7724-29100-2-CE - 2 Rev Sent

J. Eng. Technol. Sci., Vol. xx, No.
x, 201x, xxx-xxx 1
Non-linear Numerical ModellingModeling of Partially Pre-

stressed
Beam-Column Sub-assemblages Made of
Reactive Powder Concrete
Bambang Budiono1, Siti Aisyah Nurjannah2*, & Iswandi Imran1
1
Structure Research Group, Civil Engineering Department, Formatted: English (United States)
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung,
Jalan Ganesha No. 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
2
Former doctoral student of Civil Engineering Department, Formatted: English (United States)
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Formatted: English (United States)
Jalan Ganesha No. 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
2
Civil Engineering Department, Universitas Sriwijaya, Formatted: English (United States)
Jl. Raya Palembang – Prabumulih km 32 Indralaya, Indonesia Formatted: English (United States)
*E-mail: sanurjannah@gmail.com Formatted: English (United States)
Abstract. Three partially pre-stressed interior beam-column sub- Formatted: English (United States)
assemblageassemblages (SI) and two partially pre-stressed exterior beam-column Formatted: English (United States)
sub-assemblageassemblages (SE) as test specimens made of Reactive Powder
Concretereactive powder concrete were numericalnumerically modeled using a Formatted: English (United States)
finite element program. The objective of this study was to investigate the Formatted: English (United States)
behavior of the SI and SE numerical models. The numerical model inputs were Formatted: English (United States)
material data, details of test specimen dimensiondimensions, and test specimens’
Formatted: English (United States)
reinforcement.specimen reinforcements. The numerical models resistedwere
subjected to the same loads as thatthose applied in the experiments. The Formatted: English (United States)
numerical modellingmodeling results were hysteretic and backbone curves, and Formatted: English (United States)
stress distribution contours. The numerical model outputs showed good
similarity with the experimental results. The stress distribution contours of the
numerical models correlated with the crack patterns onin the joint zone of the Formatted: English (United States)
test specimens. The behavior of the SI numerical models differed thanfrom the Formatted: English (United States)
SE numerical models due to various stresses on the beam plastic joints and the
joint zones.
Keywords: finite element numerical model; partially pre-stressed; Reactive Powder Formatted: English (United States)
Concretereactive powder concrete; stress distribution; crack pattern. Formatted: English (United States)
1 Introduction Formatted: English (United States)
Five partially pre-stressed beam-column sub-assemblage test specimens were Formatted: English (United States)
numericalnumerically modeled to investigate the hysteretic curves, stress Formatted: English (United States)
distribution contours, and their relation to the behavior of test specimens. The Formatted: English (United States)
concrete materials ofmaterial used for all test specimens were Reactive Powder
Received xxxx 28th, xxx, Revised xxxx 5th, xxxx, Accepted for publication xxxxx 31st, xxxx.
Copyright ©xxxx Published by ITB Journal Publisher, ISSN: 2337-5779, DOI: 10.5614/j.eng.technol.sci.xxx.xx.xx.x
2 Bambang Budiono, et al.
Concrete was reactive powder concrete (RPC)), using local materials and Formatted ...
polypropylene micro fibersmicrofibers with a compressive strength of 101.79
MPa [1]. RPC behavior wasis more compact than normal concrete to provide
higher compressive strength. This compactness causedcauses brittle behavior,
then it needed micro fibersso that addition of microfibers is required to maintain
proper ductility. The use of polypropylene micro fibersmicrofibers can
significantly increase flexural strength, tensile strength, and shear strength
significantly [2]. All beams of the test specimens were partially pre-stressed
reinforced and the columns were fully mild steel reinforced. The loads that were
applied in the numerical modellingmodeling were the same as the loads during
the experiments, i.e. a combination of cyclic lateral and constant axial
compressive loads at the top end of the columnscolumn [1,3]. The experiments
had beenwere conducted in the Laboratory of Structure and Building
Construction, Center of Research and Development on People Housing,
Ministry of Public Works and Housing. The numerical models consisted
ofrepresented three interior beam-column sub-assemblages (SI’s) and two
exterior beam-column sub-assemblages (SE’s) with Partial Pre-Stressed
Ratiopartial pre-stressed ratio of 33.79% and 22.78%. The numerical
modellingmodeling used a program that supported finite element analysis.
2 Finite Element Method Model

The ANSYS program was used to perform the finite element analysis of the
partially pre-stressed beam-column sub-assemblage numerical models. The
RPC, mild steel bars, and pre-stressed strands were numericalnumerically
modeled using elements that provided appropriate degrees of freedom numbers.
2.1 Finite Element Equation Solution

The relation between strain and nodal displacement is expressed in the Eqs. (1)
to (3).
{𝜀} = [𝐵]{𝑢} (1) Formatted: English (United States)
where [B] is the strain-displacement matrix based on the element shape function Formatted ...
and {u} is the node displacement vector. Formatted ...
The relation of stiffness matrix [K] and [B] is as follows:
[𝐾] = ∫𝑉 [𝐵]𝑇 [𝐷][𝐵]{𝑢}𝑑𝑉 (2) Formatted: English (United States)

Formatted ...
The relation between stiffness, deformation, and load {p} is as follows:
[𝐾]{𝑢} = {𝑝} (3) Formatted: English (United States)
Formatted ...
Non-linear Numerical Modeling of Partially Pre-stressed BCS of RPC3
2.2 Numerical Models
2.2.1 Concrete Numerical Model

In the ANSYS program, the concrete elements are numericalwere numerically
modeled using SOLID65 element as an 8-node three -dimensional brick
elements [4]. Each node hashad three degrees of freedom of translation to the X, Formatted: English (United States)
Y, and Z axes. The SOLID65 element iswas modeled as aan element cracked
element due to tensile stress, crushed element due to compressive stress, plastic
deformation, and creep.
1. Isotropic Condition Formatted ...

In an isotropic material, the stress matrix {σ} and strain matrix {ε} are Formatted ...
connected by the operator matrix [D] as in the following elasticity matrix.:
{σ} = [D]{ε} (4) Formatted: English (United States)
-1
The inverse matrix of elasticity [D] is expressed in Eq. (5).): Formatted: English (United States)
1/𝐸𝑥 −𝜐𝑥𝑦 /𝐸𝑥 −𝜐𝑥𝑧 /𝐸𝑥 0 0 0 Formatted ...

−𝜐𝑦𝑥 /𝐸𝑦 1/𝐸𝑦 −𝜐𝑦𝑧 /𝐸𝑦 0 0 0
−𝜐𝑧𝑥 /𝐸𝑧 −𝜐𝑧𝑦 /𝐸𝑧 1/𝐸𝑧 0 0 0
[𝐷]−1 = (5)
0 0 0 1/𝐺𝑥𝑦 0 0
0 0 0 0 1/𝐺𝑦𝑧 0
[ 0 0 0 0 0 1/𝐺𝑥𝑧 ]
where 𝐸𝑥 , 𝜈𝑥𝑦 , 𝜈𝑦𝑥 , and 𝐺𝑥𝑦 are Young'sthe Young modulus inon the x-axis, the Formatted: Indent: Left: 0"
major Poisson'sPoisson ratio, the minor Poisson'sPoisson ratio, and the shear
modulus in the x-y plane, respectively.
2. Crack Behavior on Concrete Element Formatted ...
The material stiffness matrix under isotropic material conditionconditions is as Formatted ...
follows:
(1 − 𝜐) 𝜐 𝜐 0 0 0 Formatted ...
𝜐 (1 − 𝜐) 𝜐 0 0 0 Formatted ...
c 𝐸 𝜐 𝜐 (1 − 𝜐) 0 0 0
D = (1+𝜐)(1−2𝜐) . 0 (1−2𝜐) 0 0 (6)
0 0
2 (1−2𝜐) 0
0 0 0 0 2 (1−2𝜐)
[ 0 0 0 0 0 2 ]
where E is the concrete elastic modulus (MPa) and υ is Poisson'sthe Poisson Formatted ...
ratio of concrete. The matrix of material stiffness based on the stress-strain
correlation for materials considered to be cracked in one direction is shown in
Eq. (7).):
𝑅𝑡 (1−𝜐) 0 0 Formatted: English (United States)

1 𝜐 0 0 0
𝐸
(1−𝜐) (1−𝜐) 0 0 0 Formatted ...
0 𝜐 1 0 0 0 Formatted
𝐸 ...
𝐷𝑐𝑐𝑘 =.(1+𝜐). 0 (1−𝜐)(1−𝜐)𝛽𝑡 0 0 (7)
0 Formatted ...
0 0 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 2 𝛽𝑡
0 2]
[ 0 0 0 0
If the crack is closed due to the un-loading conditionunloading, the compressive
stresses perpendicular to the crack plane will be forwarded to the crack and
there is only a shear transfer coefficient βc, then. Then the stiffness matrix Formatted: English (United States)
becomes as in Eq. (8).):
(1 − 𝜐) 𝜐 𝜐 0 0 0 Formatted ...
𝜐 (1 − 𝜐) 𝜐 0 0 0 Formatted ...
𝐸 𝜐 𝜐 (1 − 𝜐) 0 0 0
𝐷𝑐𝑐𝑘 =. (1+𝜐)(1−2𝜐). (8) Formatted ...
0 0 0
𝛽𝑐 (1−2𝜐) 0 0
2 𝛽𝑐 (1−2𝜐) 0
0 0 0 0 2 𝛽𝑐 (1−2𝜐)
[ 0 0 0 0 0 ]
2
2.2.2 Mild Steel and Strand Numerical Models

In the ANSYS program, a longitudinal or transversal mild steel bar is
numericalwas numerically modeled byusing the LINK8 element [4]. The Formatted: English (United States)
element iswas formed by two points at the ends of the bar in the X, Y, Z
Cartesian coordinate system. Each point hashad three degrees of freedom of
translations toward the X, Y, and Z axes. The element doesdid not resist
moment and the stress iswas assumed to be equal along the bar element. The
elementelement’s stiffness matrix is as in Eq. (9).):
1 0 0 −1 0 0 Formatted: English (United States)

0 0 0 0 0 0 Formatted ...
[𝐾] =. 𝑠. 0 0 0 0 0 0
𝐴𝐸
(9) Formatted ...
𝐿 −1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 Formatted ...
[ 0 0 0 0 0 0]
where A is the cross-sectional area of the element (mm2), Es is the steel elastic Formatted ...
modulus (MPa), and L is the elemental length (mm).
2.2.3 Bond-Slip Interface Numerical Model in the ANSYS Program

In the ANSYS program input, the stress-strain curves are influenced by bonds
between the concrete and the mild steel bars or pre-stressed strands. The
interface between the mild steel bars or pre-stressed strands with concrete is
numericalwas numerically modeled using a CONTA178 node to node element
which haswith three degrees of freedom of translations toward the X, Y, and Z
axes and causes, causing slip (gap) between the concrete and the mild steel bars
or pre-stressed strands [4]. The CONTA178 elements arewere applied along the Formatted: English (United States)
longitudinal mild steel bars or pre-stressed strands, which resisted compressive
and tensile forces under cyclic lateral loads.
The propertyproperty of the CONTA178 element isis the curve of bond stress
(τb) and the strain (εb) correlation. The correlation between concrete strain and Formatted ...
athe mild steel bar or pre-stressed strand transferred to the concrete around athe
mild steel bar or pre-stressed strand is expressed in Eq. (10) [5].]:
𝜀𝑐 = 𝜀𝑠 − 𝜀𝑏 (10) Formatted: English (United States)
where εc, εs, and εb are the concrete strains, mild steel bar or pre-stressed strand Formatted ...
strain, and mild steel bar or pre-stressed strand strain that are transferred to the Formatted ...
concrete around athe mild steel bar or pre-stressed strand (bond strain),
respectively. If the attachment between the concrete and the mild steel bar or the
pre-stressed strand is reduced or lost due to the crackcracking of the concrete,
then the slip occurs. The correlation between concrete cracks withand mild steel
bar strain or pre-stressed strand strain transferred to the concrete around athe
mild steel bar or pre-stressed strand is described in Eq. (11).):
2 𝛿𝑏 Formatted: English (United States)
𝜀𝑏 =. (11)
𝐶𝑠
Formatted ...
where δb, Cs, dan and T are slip length (mm), crack width (mm), and tensile Formatted ...
force (Newton), respectively, as shown in Figure 1.
Formatted ...
T T
b b b b
Cs Cs
Figure 1 Specimen of concentric tensile test [6]. Formatted ...
The crack widths arewere obtained from the experimental results. The strain Formatted ...
conditions due to the loss of attachment can be divided in the following three
conditions [7]: Formatted: Enumeration, Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering
Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at:
1. εb ≤ εb0The condition. 0" + Tab after: 0" + Indent at: 0.25"
3. εb ≤ εb0. The maximum slip distance when the attachment breaks-down is Formatted: English (United States)
0.0317 mm [8], then]. Then the attachment strain of break-down is:
63.4 × 10−3
𝜀𝑏0 =. (12) Formatted ...
𝐶𝑠
Formatted ...
𝜏𝑏 = [0.0451 𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 − 1.07 (𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )2 + 12.5(𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )3 Formatted ...
−58.2(𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )4 ]√𝑓𝑐′ × 103 (13) Formatted ...
𝜏 Formatted ...
𝐸𝑏 =. 𝑏 (14)
𝜀𝑏 Formatted ...
1.07 𝐶𝑠2 𝜀𝑏0 2

12.5𝐶𝑠3 𝜀𝑏0 3
58.2𝐶𝑠4 𝜀𝑏0 3 Formatted
𝐸𝑏 = [0.0451 𝐶𝑠 − + − ]√𝑓𝑐′ × 10 (15) ...
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Because:
Formatted: Font: 11 pt, English (United States)
𝑇
𝐸𝑏 × 𝜀𝑏 −. =0 (16) Formatted: Indent: Left: 0"
𝑂 𝐶𝑠
𝑇 = 𝐴𝑠 𝐸𝑠 𝜀𝑠 (17)
Formatted ...
then for a pre-stressed strand, if the tensile force that occurs is higher than the Formatted ...
initial tensile force in the pre-stressing process, the equationEquation (17)
becomes as follows:
Formatted ...
𝑇𝑝 = 𝐴𝑝 𝐸𝑝 𝜀𝑝 (18) Formatted: English (United States)
thenThen: Formatted ...

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0"
[0.0451 𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 − 1.07 (𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )2 + 12.5(𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )3 − 58.2(𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )4 ]
𝑇 Formatted
√𝑓𝑐′ × 103 𝑂 𝐶 = 0 (19) ...
𝑠
where εbo, τb, Eb, O, As, Ap, Es, and Ep are bond strain at break-down, concrete Formatted ...
stress (MPa), concrete elastic modulus (MPa), circumference of mild steel bar
or pre-strand strand cross section (mm), mild steel bar cross section area (mm2),
pre-stressed strand cross-section area (mm2), elastic modulus (secant) of mild
steel bar (MPa), and the elastic modulus (secant) of pre-stressed strand (MPa),
respectively.
2. The condition |𝜀𝑏𝑜 | < |𝜀𝑏 | ≤ 𝛿1 |𝜀𝑏𝑜 | condition,, when the attachment starts Formatted ...
to damage.
4. Thebeing damaged. δ1 is 3. Formatted: Enumeration, Left, Indent: First line: 0"
𝜏𝑏,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = [0.0451 𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 − 1.07 (𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )2 + 12.5(𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )3 Formatted: English (United States)

Formatted ...
−58.2(𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )4 ]√𝑓𝑐′ × 103 (20) Formatted ...
𝑂 𝐶𝑠 𝜏𝑏,𝑚𝑎𝑥 Formatted
εc =. (21) ...
𝐴𝑠 𝐸𝑠
where εc is the concrete strain (constant) and τb,max is the maximum attachment Formatted ...
stress transferred to the concrete (MPa).
3. The condition 𝛿1 |𝜀𝑏𝑜 | < |𝜀𝑏 | ≤ 𝛿2 |𝜀𝑏𝑜 | condition, when the attachment Formatted ...
damages.
5. has been damaged. Concrete stress on the descending branch of the stress- Formatted: Enumeration, Left
strain curve:
0.9 (𝜀𝑏 −𝛿1 𝜀𝑏0 ) Formatted: English (United States)
𝜏𝑏,𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑝 = 𝜏𝑏,𝑚𝑎𝑥 .[1 −
𝜀𝑏0 (𝛿2 −𝛿1 )
] √𝑓𝑐′ (22)
Formatted ...
𝑂 𝐶𝑠 𝜏𝑏,𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑝
𝜀𝑐 =. (23) Formatted ...
𝐴𝑠 𝐸𝑠
Formatted ...
where τb,slip is the attachment stress when the slip is transferred to the concrete
(MPa) and δ2 is 1.7516.
Formatted ...
4.6. The condition 𝛿2 |𝜀𝑏𝑜 | < |𝜀𝑏 | condition, when the attachment does not work Formatted ...
at all. Formatted ...
𝜏𝑏 0.1 𝜏𝑏,𝑚𝑎𝑥 (24) Formatted ...
2.3 Non-linear Equation Numerical Model

The equilibrium equation for a linear system is expressed as:
[𝐾]{𝑢} = {𝐹 𝑎 } (25)
where [𝐾], {𝑢}, and {𝐹 𝑎 } are structural stiffness matrix, degrees of freedom Formatted ...
vector, and working load vector, respectively. Formatted ...
In nonlinear cases, the Newton-Raphson iteration process is required to solve

Eq. (26). It performs iterations for solving each incremental equilibrium.: Formatted ...
[𝐾𝑖𝑇 ]{∆𝑢𝑖 } = {𝐹 𝑎 } − {𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑟 } (26) Formatted ...
{𝑢𝑖+1 } = {𝑢𝑖 } + {∆𝑢𝑖 } (27) Formatted ...
where [𝐾𝑖𝑇 ],
{𝑢𝑖 }, and {𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑟 }
are the structural stiffness matrix, degrees of Formatted: English (United States)
freedom vector, and working load vector, respectively. Formatted ...
Formatted ...
For a convergent solution, multiple times of iteration are needed initerations
Formatted ...
with the following steps are needed:
1. Assume the value of {𝑢𝑜 }. Usually, {𝑢𝑜 } is the solution of the previous Formatted: English (United States)
iteration step, then in the first iteration, {𝑢𝑜 } = {0} Formatted ...
2. Create [𝐾𝑖𝑇 ] matrix, {𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑟 } from confirmed {𝑢𝑖 }. Formatted ...
3. Determine {∆𝑢𝑖 }.
Formatted ...
4. Add {∆𝑢𝑖 } to {𝑢𝑖 } to obtain {𝑢𝑖+1 }
Formatted ...
3 Numerical ModellingModeling of the Test Specimens
Formatted ...
The numerical modellingNumerical modeling of the three SI and two SE test Formatted ...
specimens was conducted byusing the finite element method. The numerical Formatted ...
model inputs referred to the material test results of RPC, mild steel bars, and
pre-stressed strands, the details of the test specimen dimensiondimensions, and
the test specimens’specimen reinforcement. Formatted ...
3.1 Test Specimen Details Formatted ...

Formatted ...
All test specimens were designed to resist seismic loads. The reinforcement of
Formatted ...
the beams consisted of mild steel bars and pre-stressed strands, while the
columns were reinforced by mild steel bars. The Partial Pre-Stressed Formatted ...
Ratiopartial pre-stressed ratio (PPR) levels on the beams were 22.78% and Formatted ...
33.79% and the strands were placed un-bondedlyunbondedly in the plastic
hinge of the beams to reduce strain and slow down the damagesdamaging due to
cyclic lateral forces [9,10].
The details of reinforcementthe reinforcements are shown in Figures 2, 3, and 4. Formatted ...
Each test specimen was placed on a loading framesframe and resisted loads
from vertical and horizontal hydrolic jacks as shown in Figure 5.
Figure 2 SI-A-33.79, SI-B-33.79, and SI-B-22.78 test specimens [1]. Formatted: English (United States)

Figure 3 SE-A-33.79 and SE-B-22.78 test specimens [1]. Formatted: English (United States)
Figure 4 Sections of all test specimens.
Hydraulic Jack;
Hydraulic Jack;
Axial capacity: 2000 kN
Lateral capacity: 1000 kN
Reaction Frame
Reaction
Wall
Linear Variable
Load Cell Displacement
Transducer
(LVDT)
Reaction Floor
Figure 5 A specimen on the loading framesframe.

3.2 Numerical Models

Each numerical model had the name, dimensiondimensions, reinforcement
details, and Partial Pre-Stressed Ratiopartial pre-stressed ratio (PPR) according Formatted: English (United States)
to the related test specimen (Table 1). The RPC, mild steel bar, and pre-stressed Formatted: English (United States)
strand elements on the beam-column sub-assemblages were meshed for finite
element analysis. The front viewFront views of all SI and SE numerical models
are shown in Figures 6 and 7. Formatted: English (United States)
Table 1 Five typesTypes of beamBeam-column subSub-assemblage numerical
model.Numerical Models
Stirrup space on the
beam plastic hinges PPR
Numerical model Type
s (%) Formatted: English (United States)
(mm) Formatted: English (United States)
SI-A-33.79 Interior 100 33.79 Formatted: English (United States)
SI-B-33.79 Interior 50 33.79 Formatted: English (United States)
SI-B-22.78 Interior 50 22.78
SE-A-33.79 ExteriorEksterior 100 33.79
SE-B-22.78 EksteriorExterior 50 22.78
1
ELEMENTS
FEB 5 2016 Formatted: English (United States)
20:13:12
100
LINK180
(Mild steel bar) Formatted: English (United States)
1325 Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Font color: Black
SOLID65 (Reactive
Powder Concrete) Formatted: English (United States)
100 50
350 LINK180
1325 (Pre-stressed Strand)
Y
Z X 1775 1775 Formatted: English (United States)
INTERIOR BEAM-COLUMN SUBASSEMBLAGE, TYPE-1 (N.mm)
Figure 6 The frontFront view of Interior Beam-Column Subthe beam-column

sub-assemblage numerical modelmodel’s interior (unit: mm).
1
ELEMENTS
FEB 5 2016
20:06:41
LINK180 100
(Mild steel bar)
1325
SOLID65 (Reactive
Powder Concrete)
350
100 50
1325
350 150
LINK180
(Pre-stressed Strand)
Y
Z X 1775
EXTERIOR BEAM-COLUMN SUBASSEMBLAGE, TYPE-1 (N.mm)
Figure 7 The frontFront view of the beam-column subExterior Beam-Column Formatted: Font color: Black
Sub-assemblage numerical model model’s Exterior (unit: mm).
3.3 Loading History

In the numerical modellingmodeling, the lateral cyclic loading was based on
displacement control [3] and applied only onin cycle 1. This was because at Formatted: English (United States)
each drift ratio, the output of the lateral force-deflection hysteretic curve onin
cycle 2 and 3 was almost the same as the output of the lateral force-deflection
hysteretic curve onin cycle 1 [11]. To simplify the analysis, the numerical Formatted: English (United States)
models were performed only onin cycle 1 at each drift ratio, i.e. 0.20, 0.25, Formatted: English (United States)
0.35, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00, 1.40, 1.75, 2.20, 2.75, 3.50, and 5.00 percent. Formatted: English (United States)
4 Hysteretic Curves
The verification of the numerical models toagainst the experimental results
includesincluded curve shape and ductility. The hysteretic and backbone curves
of all numerical models arewere relatively the same withas those of the
experimental resultresults. Figures 8 to 12 show the hysteretic and backbone Formatted: English (United States)
curves offor the lateral force and the displacement relation. There are curves of Formatted: English (United States)
the test specimens and the related numerical models. The lateral force
differences between the numerical modelmodels and the test specimen curves
on some high drift ratios are due to the reduced strength and stiffness of the
numerical models. This was caused by the cracked and crushed concrete
elements of the numerical models. In this condition, the contribution of the

concrete elements ofin the numerical models onto strength and stiffness wereis
decreased significantly [12]. However, the ductility values of the numerical Formatted: English (United States)
modellingmodeling results are close to the experimental results [11].
300 300
Lateral Forces (kN)

Lateral Forces (kN)
200 200
100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Drift Ratio (%) Drift Ratio (%)
SI-A-33.79 specimen [1] SI-A-33.79 specimen [1]
SI-A-33.79 model SI-A-33.79 model
300 300
Lateral Forces (kN)
Lateral Forces (kN)
200 200
100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
SI-A-33.79 specimen [1] SI-A-33.79 specimen [1]
SI-A-33.79 model SI-A-33.79 model
(a) Hysteretic curves of 0% to 5 % drift ratio (b) Backbone curves of 0% to 5 % drift ratio Formatted: English (United States)
Figure 8 Hysteretic and backbone curves of SI-A-33.79 test specimen and Formatted: English (United States)
numerical model.
300 300
Lateral Forces (kN)

200
Lateral Forces (kN)
200
100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
SI-B-33.79 specimen [1] SI-B-33.79 specimen [1]

SI-B-33.79 model SI-B-33.79 model
300 300
Lateral Forces (kN)
200
Lateral Forces (kN)
200
100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

(a) Hysteretic curves of 0% to 5 % drift (b) Backbone curves of 0% to 5 % drift ratio Formatted: English (United States)
ratio.
Figure 9 Hysteretic and backbone curves of SI-B-33.79 test specimen and
numerical model.
300 300
Lateral Lateral (kN)

200 200
Lateral Forces (kN)
100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

300 300
Lateral Lateral (kN)
200 200
Lateral Forces (kN)
100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

(a) Hysteretic curves of 0% to 5 % drift ratio. (b) Backbone curves of 0% to 5 % drift ratio. Formatted: English (United States)
Figure 10 Hysteretic and backbone curves of SI-B-22.78 test specimen and Formatted: English (United States)
numerical model.
Lateral Forces (kN)

300 300
200 200
Lateral Forces
100 100
(kN)
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
SE-A-33.79 specimen [1] SE-A-33.79 specimen [1]
SE-A-33.79 model SE-A-33.79 model
Lateral Forces (kN)
300 300
200 200
Lateral Forces
100 100
(kN)
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
SE-A-33.79 specimen [1] SE-A-33.79 specimen [1]
SE-A-33.79 model SE-A-33.79 model
Figure 11 Hysteretic and backbone curves of SE-A-33.79 test specimen and
numerical model.
300 300
200
Lateral Forces (kN)

200
Lateral Forces (kN)
100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
SE-B-22.78 specimen [1] SE-B-22.78 specimen [1]

SE-B-22.78 model SE-B-22.78 model
300 300
200
Lateral Forces (kN)
200
Lateral Forces (kN)
100 100
0 0
-100 -100
-200 -200
-300 -300
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
SE-B-22.78 specimen [1] SE-B-22.78 specimen [1]

SE-B-22.78 model SE-B-22.78 model
Figure 12 Hysteretic and backbone curves of SE-B-22.78 test specimen and
numerical model.
5 Stress Distribution
In general, all numerical models on 0.20% drift ratio began to resist the tensile
and the compressive stresses.stress at 0.20% drift ratio. The tensile stress was
less than 5 MPa, lower than the primary compressive stress, and below the
average tensile stress value of the material test result of 6.59 MPa. The tensile
stress increased along with the drift ratio increment. A diagonal strut action
occurred on the joint zone of all SI and SE numerical models onat 0.35% drift
ratio. Plastic joints on the beams had beenwere formed by significantly
increased stress. The diagonal strut beganbecame wider and increased the stress
on the next drift ratios. After the peak lateral force, the degradation of strength
and stiffness beganset in.
OnIn all SI numerical models, there were decreased concrete stresses at the
center of the joint zone aswhen the concrete had exceeded its peak compressive
strength. The low tensile stress of the joint zone centers extended onincreased at
5.00% drift ratio. This indicatedindicates widespread damage when compared to
the conditions of 3.50% drift ratio (Figures 13, 14, and 15). OnIn the SE Formatted: English (United States)
numerical models, the stress was aboveover 43.89 MPa (dark blue) in the Formatted: English (United States)
middle of the joint zones and began to spread. The shape of the diagonal strut Formatted: English (United States)
began to change and spread until 5.00% drift ratio (Figures 16 and 17). The
stress on the SE beambeams was higher than that ofon the SI beambeams of the
numerical models with the same PPR onat 3.50% drift ratio, especially in the Formatted: English (United States)
1
plastic
ELEMENT hinge areas. ItThis was indicated by the color of the stress contours. The
SOLUTION
larger stresses leadedled to larger ultimate shear forces on the beams ofMAYthe1 SE
STEP=20
2016
00:43:46
test specimens, especially in the plastic hinges. The stress was higher onin
SUB =4 the
TIME=20
S3 SE numerical
(NOAVG) model, with a PPR of 33.79%%, than in the SE numerical model,
DMX =45.5332
with a PPR of 22.78%%, because of higher lateral forces.
SMN =-208.372
SMX =46.6467
1 1
ELEMENT SOLUTION ELEMENT SOLUTION
MAY 1 2016 APR 30 2016
STEP=18 STEP=26
00:42:18 SUB =8 18:04:52
SUB =4
TIME=18 TIME=26
S3 (NOAVG) S3 (NOAVG)
DMX =36.3812 DMX =92.326
SMN =-195.127 SMN =-213.34
SMX =41.4458 SMX =46.96
MN
MN
Y Y
Z X MX
Z X MX MN
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111 -50

-43.8889
-37.7778
-31.6667
-25.5556
-19.4444
-13.3333
-7.22222
-1.11111
5 Formatted: English (United States)
(a) OnAt 1.40% drift ratio: Loading Step (LS)-
-43.8889 -31.6667
-19.4444 -7.22222 5
(b) OnAt 3.50% drift ratio: LS-26; decreased
18; theincreased stress in the center of the compressive stress due to increased concrete Formatted: English (United States)
jointY zone diagonal strut (light blue) rised damagesdamage in the middle of the joint
Formatted: Highlight
(25.56 to 37.78 MPa) zone (red) extended (1.11 MPa); continued
Z X MX of strength and stiffness degradation Formatted: English (United States)
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111
-43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5 Formatted: Highlight
Figure 13 Main stress distribution (σ3) onin SI-A-33.79 longitudinal section; push
load condition (unit: MPa).
1
ELEMENT SOLUTION
MAY 1 2016
STEP=20
SUB =4 Non-linear Numerical Modeling of Partially Pre-stressed BCS of00:43:46
RPC19
TIME=20
S3 (NOAVG)
DMX =45.5332
SMN =-208.372
SMX =46.6467
1
ELEMENT SOLUTION
1
ELEMENT SOLUTION
MAY 1 2016 MAY 1 2016
STEP=18 STEP=26
SUB =6 12:50:52 12:54:02
SUB =10
TIME=18 TIME=26
DMX =36.3936 DMX =92.2868
SMN =-183.377 SMN =-199.405
SMX =41.643 SMX =42.2784
MN
MN
Y Y
Z X MX Z X MX MN
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111 -50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111
-43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
(a) OnAt 1.40% drift ratio: LS-18; theincreased
INTERIOR BEAM-COLUMN SUBASSEMBLAGE, TYPE-1 (N.mm) (b) OnAt 3.50% drift ratio: LS-26; decreased
-43.8889 -31.6667
-19.4444 -7.22222 5
stress in the center of the joint zone diagonal compressive stress due to increased
strut (light blue) rised (25.56 s.d.to 37.78 concrete damagesdamage in the middle of Formatted: Highlight
MPa)Y the joint zone (red) extended (1.11 MPa);
continued degradation of strength and Formatted: Highlight
Z X MX stiffness Formatted: Highlight
1
ELEMENT SOLUTION
MAY 1 2016
STEP=20 -50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111
-43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
00:43:46
SUB =4
INTERIOR
TIME=20 BEAM-COLUMN SUBASSEMBLAGE, TYPE-1 (N.mm)
S3 (NOAVG)
Figure
DMX =45.5332
14 Main stress distribution (σ3) onin SI-B-33.79 longitudinal section; push
load condition (unit: MPa).
SMN =-208.372
SMX =46.6467
1 1
ELEMENT SOLUTION ELEMENT SOLUTION
MAY 1 2016 MAY 1 2016
STEP=18 STEP=26
14:43:38 SUB =28 14:47:45
SUB =4
TIME=18 TIME=26
DMX =36.3652 DMX =91.6973
SMN =-189.208 SMN =-239.323
SMX =40.9493 SMX =49.9902
MN
MN
Y Y
Z X Z X MX MN
MX
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111

-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111 -43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
-43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
(a) OnAt 1.40 drift ratio: LS-18 ; the; increased
INTERIOR BEAM-COLUMN SUBASSEMBLAGE, TYPE-1 (N.mm) (b) OnAt 3.50% drift ratio: LS-26; decreased
stress in the center of the joint zone compressive stress due to increased
diagonal strut (light blue) rised (25.56 s.d.to concrete break-down in the middle of the Formatted: Highlight
Y
37.78 MPa) joint zone (red) extended;); continued Formatted: Highlight
Z X MX degradation of strength and stiffness
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111

-43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
Figure 15 Comparison of primary stress distribution (σ3) onin SI-B-22.78 and
SE-B-22.78 longitudinal section (unit: MPa).
…
1
ELEMENT SOLUTION
20 Bambang Budiono, et al. MAY 1 2016
STEP=20
SUB =4 00:43:46
TIME=20
S3 (NOAVG)
DMX =45.5332
1
SMN =-208.372
ELEMENT SOLUTION
1
ELEMENT SOLUTION
APR 30 2016 APR 30 2016
SMX =46.6467
STEP=18
SUB =5 23:37:28
STEP=26
SUB =16 22:47:27
TIME=18 TIME=26
DMX =36.2123 DMX =93.1224
SMN =-216.072 SMN =-195.482
SMX =49.8336 SMX =50.963
MN
MN
MN
Y Y
Z X MX Z X MX
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111 -50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111
(a) OnAt 1.40% drift ratio: LS-18; theincreased
-43.8889 -31.6667
-19.4444 -7.22222 5
(b) OnAt 3.50% drift ratio: LS-26; the stress
-43.8889
-31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
stress in the center of the joint zone diagonal above 43.89 MPa (dark blue) in the
strut (light blue) rised (25.56 s.d.to 37.78 middle of the joint zone spreaded.
MPa) Y Thespread; the shape of the diagonal strut
started to change and spread since theat
Z X MX 2.75% drift ratio
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111

1 -43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
ELEMENT SOLUTION
STEP=20Figure 16 Comparison of primary stress distribution (σ3) onin longitudinal
MAY 1 2016
SUB =4 section of 00:43:46
SE-A-33.79; push load condition (unit: MPa).
TIME=20
S3 (NOAVG)
DMX =45.5332
1
ELEMENT SOLUTION
1
ELEMENT SOLUTION
SMN =-208.372
STEP=18
SUB =6
MAY 1 2016
17:25:21
STEP=26
SUB =9
MAY 1 2016
17:27:40
SMX =46.6467
TIME=18
S3 (NOAVG)
TIME=26
S3 (NOAVG)
DMX =36.204 DMX =91.8464
SMN =-177.379 SMN =-341.596
SMX =49.8596 SMX =59.6987
MN
MN MN
Y Y
Z X MX Z X MX
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111 -50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111
-43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5 -43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
EXTERIOR BEAM-COLUMN SUBASSEMBLAGE, TYPE-2 (N.mm) EXTERIOR BEAM-COLUMN SUBASSEMBLAGE, TYPE-2 (N.mm)
(a) OnAt 1.40% drift ratio: LS-18; theincreased (b) OnAt 3.50% drift ratio: LS-26; the stress
stress in the center of the joint zone diagonal above 43.89 MPa (dark blue) in the
strut (light blue) rised (25.56 s.d.to 37.78 middle of the joint zone spreadedspread;
MPa)Y the shape of the diagonal strut started to
change and spread since at 2.75% drift
Z X MX ratio.
-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111

-43.8889 -31.6667 -19.4444 -7.22222 5
Figure 17 Comparison of primary stress distribution (σ3) onin SE-B-22.78
longitudinal section; push load condition (unit: MPa).
The stress distribution contours of all SI numerical models corresponded to the

crack pattern onpatterns in the joint zone of all SI test specimens due to
diagonal cracks under cyclic lateral loadsload and damagesdamage in the center
of the joint zones (Figures 18.a, 18a,b, c). The compressive stress ofon the joint
zoneszone increased and haddid not reached thereach peak compressive stress
until the end of loading onin all SE numerical models. This
correspondedcorresponds to the crack patterns of the joint zones of all SE test
specimens, as there were only a few hair cracks (Figures 18.d, 18d,e).
(a) SI-A-33.79 (b) SI-B-33.79 Formatted: English (United States)

(c) SI-B-22.78 Formatted: English (United States)
(d) SE-A-33.79 (e) SE-B-22.78 Formatted: English (United States)

Figure 18 Crack patterns onin the joint zone of test specimens.
6 Conclusions
From the numerical modellingmodeling results, it can be concluded that the
hysteretic and backbone curves of the numerical models showshowed good
similarity with the test specimen curves. The differences were caused by
stiffness and strength degradation due to crackedcracking and crushedcrushing
of the concrete elements ofin the numerical models. This condition made the
contribution to strength and stiffness contribution of the concrete elements ofin
the numerical models decreaseddecrease significantly. However, the numerical
model results showed close values of ductility withthat were close to those from
the experimental results.
The modellingmodeling of test specimens with numerical analysis Formatted: English (United States)
showsshowed a correlation between each numerical model and the pair Formatted: English (United States)
ofrelated test specimen. The diagonal strut shapes and stress distribution Formatted: English (United States)
ofdistributions in the numerical models performed similarity with similarly as
the crack patterns ofin the test specimens. The stress distribution showed that
the diagonal strut action formed in the joint zones formed sincefrom the Formatted: English (United States)
beginning of loading onin all SI and SE numerical models. The stress continued Formatted: English (United States)
to increase according to the loading history. After achieving the peak lateral Formatted: English (United States)
forcesforce, the behavior of the SI numerical models began to differ thanfrom
the SE numerical models. OnIn the SI numerical models, the diagonal strut
shapes changed due to spread stressesstress on the joint zones, which were
followed by decreased stresses,stress and then relativerelatively constant
stressesstress. This corresponded to the crack patterns ofin all SI test specimens
because there were many diagonal cracks onin the joint zones due to the
diagonal strut actionsaction. The stress continued to increase and then
beganbecame relatively constant and had. It did not achieved theachieve
maximum stress onin all SE numerical models. This corresponded to the crack
patterns ofin all SE test specimens since there were almost no diagonal cracks in
the joint zones because the maximum stress hadwas not been achieved.
7 Recommendation Formatted: English (United States)

7 Recommendations Formatted: English (United States)
Numerical modellingmodeling of crack patterns to be compared with the Formatted: English (United States)
experimental results. This can be used to predict the failure behavior of the test Formatted: English (United States)
specimens. BesidesMoreover, to improve the numerical modelling, it Formatted: English (United States)
needsmodeling, finer concrete element dimensiondimensions are required to Formatted: English (United States)
avoid premature stiffness and strength degradation due to cracked and crushed Formatted: English (United States)
concrete elements that decreased , which significantly decrease the strength and Formatted: English (United States)
stiffness ofin the numerical models significantly.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by PT Wijaya Karya Beton, Indonesia under a joint
research with the Faculty of Civil and Environment Engineering, Institut
Teknologi Bandung.
References
[1] Nurjannah, S.A., Budiono, B., Imran, I. & Sugiri, S., The Hysteretic
Behavior of Partially Pre-Stressed Beam-Column Joint Sub-Assemblages
Made of Reactive Powder Concrete, Journal of Engineering and
Technological Sciences. 48(5), pp.550-570, 2016, DOI:
http://journals.itb.ac.id/index.php/jets/article/view/2288/1842. Formatted: English (United States)
[2] Patel, P.A., Desai, A.K., and Desai, J.A., Evaluation of Eng.Engineering Formatted: English (United States)
Properties for Polypropylene Fiber Reinf.Reinforced Concrete,
International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology, III(I), Jan-
March, pp. 42-45, 2012.
[3] ACI Committee, Acceptance Criteria for Moment Frames Based on Formatted: English (United States)
Structural Testing and Commentary, ACI 374.1-05, F. Hills, USA, 2005. Formatted: English (United States)
[4] ANSYS v. 17.0 program manual. Formatted: English (United States)
[5] Foster, S.J. & Gilbert, R.I., A Discrete Bond-Slip Element for Use in Formatted: English (United States)
Modelling Reinforced Concrete Structures, the 6th International
Conference in Australia on FEM, pp.167-172, Sydney, July 8th-10th,
1991. Formatted: English (United States)
[6] Nilson, A.H., Bond Stress-Slip Relations in Reinforced Concrete, Formatted: English (United States)
Research Report No. 345, Department of Structural Engineering, Cornell Formatted: English (United States)
University, pp. 40, December, 1971. Formatted: English (United States)
[7] Budiono, B., Hysteretic Behavior of Partially-Prestressedprestressed
Concrete Beam-Columncolumn Connections, Ph.D. Dissertation,
Department of Structural Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, Formatted: English (United States)
University of New South Wales, Australia, 1995. Formatted: English (United States)
[8] Houde, J. & Mirza, M.S., A Finite Element Analysis of Shear Strength of Formatted: English (United States)
Reinforced Concrete Beams, ACI Journal, SP42-5, 1, pp. 103-128, 1974. Formatted: English (United States)
[9] BSN, SNI 03-2847-2013 The Design Method of Concrete Structure for
Buildings, Jakarta, 2013. (Text in Indonesian)
[10] ACI Committee, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete Formatted: English (United States)
(ACI 318-14) and Commentary, ACI, Farmington Hills, USA, 2014. Formatted: English (United States)
[11] Nurjannah, S. A., Hysteretic Behavior of Partially Pre-Stressedstressed

Reactive Powder Concrete Beam-Columncolumn Sub-assemblages,
Dissertation in Post Graduate of Civil Engineering Program, Institut
Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia, pp. 371, 2016. (Text in Indonesian)
[12] Kurniawan, R. The Behavior of Reactive Powder Concrete Plate-Column Formatted: English (United States)
Connection under Gravity and Cyclic Lateral Loads, Doctoral Formatted: English (United States)
Dissertation, Civil Engineering Program, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Formatted: English (United States)
Indonesia, 2015. (Text in Indonesian)

7724-29100-2-CE - 2 Rev Sent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

7724-29100-2-CE - 2 Rev Sent

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7724-29100-2-CE - 2 Rev Sent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

J. Eng. Technol. Sci., Vol. xx, No.

Non-linear Numerical ModellingModeling of Partially Pre-

2 Finite Element Method Model

2.1 Finite Element Equation Solution

The relation of stiffness matrix [K] and [B] is as follows:

[𝐾] = ∫𝑉 [𝐵]𝑇 [𝐷][𝐵]{𝑢}𝑑𝑉 (2) Formatted: English (United States)

2.2 Numerical Models

2.2.1 Concrete Numerical Model

1. Isotropic Condition Formatted ...

1/𝐸𝑥 −𝜐𝑥𝑦 /𝐸𝑥 −𝜐𝑥𝑧 /𝐸𝑥 0 0 0 Formatted ...

𝑅𝑡 (1−𝜐) 0 0 Formatted: English (United States)

2.2.2 Mild Steel and Strand Numerical Models

1 0 0 −1 0 0 Formatted: English (United States)

2.2.3 Bond-Slip Interface Numerical Model in the ANSYS Program

𝜀𝑐 = 𝜀𝑠 − 𝜀𝑏 (10) Formatted: English (United States)

Formatted: English (United States)

Figure 1 Specimen of concentric tensile test [6]. Formatted ...

1.07 𝐶𝑠2 𝜀𝑏0 2

thenThen: Formatted ...

𝜏𝑏,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = [0.0451 𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 − 1.07 (𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )2 + 12.5(𝐶𝑠 𝜀𝑏 )3 Formatted: English (United States)

2.3 Non-linear Equation Numerical Model

In nonlinear cases, the Newton-Raphson iteration process is required to solve

[𝐾𝑖𝑇 ]{∆𝑢𝑖 } = {𝐹 𝑎 } − {𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑟 } (26) Formatted ...

{𝑢𝑖+1 } = {𝑢𝑖 } + {∆𝑢𝑖 } (27) Formatted ...

3.1 Test Specimen Details Formatted ...

Formatted: English (United States)

Formatted: English (United States)

Formatted: English (United States)

Figure 4 Sections of all test specimens.

Figure 5 A specimen on the loading framesframe.

3.2 Numerical Models

INTERIOR BEAM-COLUMN SUBASSEMBLAGE, TYPE-1 (N.mm)

Figure 6 The frontFront view of Interior Beam-Column Subthe beam-column

3.3 Loading History

elements of the numerical models. In this condition, the contribution of the

Lateral Forces (kN)

Lateral Forces (kN)

Drift Ratio (%) Drift Ratio (%)

SI-B-33.79 specimen [1] SI-B-33.79 specimen [1]

Drift Ratio (%) Drift Ratio (%)

SI-B-33.79 specimen [1] SI-B-33.79 specimen [1]

Lateral Lateral (kN)

SI-B-22.78 specimen [1] SI-B-22.78 specimen [1]

SI-B-22.78 specimen [1] SI-B-22.78 specimen [1]

Lateral Forces (kN)

Lateral Forces (kN)

SE-B-22.78 specimen [1] SE-B-22.78 specimen [1]

SE-B-22.78 specimen [1] SE-B-22.78 specimen [1]

-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111 -50

-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111

-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111

-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111

-50 -37.7778 -25.5556 -13.3333 -1.11111

The stress distribution contours of all SI numerical models corresponded to the

(a) SI-A-33.79 (b) SI-B-33.79 Formatted: English (United States)

(c) SI-B-22.78 Formatted: English (United States)

(d) SE-A-33.79 (e) SE-B-22.78 Formatted: English (United States)

Figure 18 Crack patterns onin the joint zone of test specimens.