Earthquake

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS
Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2011; 40:605–622

Published online 8 September 2010 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/eqe.1037
Seismic resistance capacity of beam–column connections

in high-rise buildings: E-Defense shaking table test
Yu-Lin Chung1, ∗, † , Takuya Nagae2 , Tomohiro Matsumiya3 and Masayoshi Nakashima1

1 Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University, Gokasho, Uji, Kyoto 611-0011, Japan
2 E-Defense, National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention,
Shinjimicho, Miki, Hyogo 673-0515, Japan
3 Kinki University, Kowakae, Higashi-Osaka 577-5802, Japan
SUMMARY
A series of E-Defense shaking table tests are conducted on a large-scale test specimen that represents
a high-rise steel building. Two types of connections featuring the connection details commonly used in
1970s, in the early days of high-rise construction in Japan, are adopted: the field-welded connection
consisting of welded unreinforced flanges and a bolted web type, and the shop-welded connection in
which the flanges and web are all-welded to the column flange in the shop. To examine the seismic
capacity of a total of 24 beam-to-column connections of the specimen, particularly when it is subjected
to long-period ground motion characterized not so much by large amplitude as by very many cycles of
repeated loading, the test specimen is shaken repeatedly until the connections fractured. The test results
indicate that a few of the field-welded connections fractured from the bottom flange weld boundary in a
relatively small cumulative rotation primarily due to the difficulties in ensuring the welding and inspection
performance in the actual field welding. The shop-welded connections are able to sustain many cycles of
plastic rotation, with an averaged cumulative plastic rotation of 0.86 rad. Two shop-welded connections
exhibit ductile fractures but only after experiencing many cycles. The presence of RC floor slabs promotes
the strain concentration at the toe of the weld access hole in the bottom flange by at least twice compared
with the case without the slab, which had resulted in a decrease in the cumulative plastic rotation by
about 50%. Copyright 䉷 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 7 February 2010; Revised 2 June 2010; Accepted 4 June 2010
KEY WORDS: high-rise building; long-period ground motion; beam-to-column connection; composite
action
1. INTRODUCTION
Periodic occurrences of large ocean-ridge earthquakes having a magnitude over eight along the
subduction zones in the southwest part of Japan have been documented in historical materials.
Because such earthquakes have return periods of 100-to-100 and 50 years, Japan will most probably
experience the next one by the middle of this century. Subduction zone earthquakes are known to
generate long-period ground motions on land, especially in basin areas where large cities, such as
Tokyo, Nagaya, and Osaka, are located. Their predominant periods range from several to 10 s, and
the durations of primary motion extend over several minutes [1, 2]. Long-period ground motions
tend to resonate high-rise buildings whose fundamental natural periods are a few seconds, and
accordingly the energy input to the high-rise buildings is expected to reach more than several times
what has been expected in Japanese seismic design [3]. According to some numerical analyses of
∗ Correspondence to: Yu-Lin Chung, Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University, Gokasho, Uji, Kyoto
611-0011, Japan.
† E-mail: y.l.chung77@gmail.com
Copyright 䉷 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

606 Y.-L. CHUNG ET AL.
existing high-rise buildings, long-period ground motions could demand significantly larger energy
dissipation than the design waves commonly used in the Japanese seismic design, especially to
beam-to-column connections, with anticipated cumulative deformations amounting to several to
10 times larger than those expected for the design waves [4].
The 1994 Northridge and the 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu earthquakes tested the seismic performance
of steel moment frames, which have been widely used in seismic design in the U.S. and Japan. In
the earthquakes, severe damage was observed in the welded unreinforced flanges and bolted web
connections (WUF-B) [5–7]. A number of Japanese high-rise buildings built in the 1970s had also
adopted WUF-B connections, although connection details were similar but not exactly identical to
those damaged in the earthquakes.
Considering those circumstance, the writers decided to experimentally evaluate the seismic
performance of the high-rise buildings subjected to long-period ground motions. Several alternatives
were considered for the type of testing, i.e. a shaking table test, a hybrid online test, and a
quasi-static loading test. In all cases, the test specimen had to preserve a realistic scale since the
behavior involving serious damage such as fractures was to be simulated. A substructure-based
hybrid online test [8–13] was appealing to conduct such a test, but quasi-static loading was not
necessarily preferable as fracture behavior was known to be velocity-dependent. A real-time hybrid
online test [14–18] can allow for velocity-dependency, but the current state-of-the-practice has not
reached the level of reliable applications particularly for large-scale tests. A quasi-static test in an
in situ condition is notable, too, but to find a test specimen requires fortuity [19]. In reference
to those pros and cons, a shaking table test using a large-scale shaking table was adopted [20].
A substructure test method was employed, and a test specimen that represented a 21 story steel
high-rise building was shaken on a very large shaking table, dubbed the E-Defense shaking table
[21–23]. The test specimen, whose detail will be described later, consisted of a four-story frame
structure that featured full-scale steel members and reinforced concrete slabs, and substitute layers
that were placed on top of the frame and represented the upper stories. Two types of connections,
both popularly used for Japanese high-rise buildings constructed in late 1960s to 1970s, were
included in the frame: the field-welded connection, which is a type of WUF-B, and the shop-welded
connection, in which the beam web is welded rather than bolted, and the entire connection is
fabricated in the shop [7]. Three ground motions, including one motion used in Japanese seismic
design, one near fault motion, and two long-period ground motions, were applied sequentially with
increasing magnitudes. The largest inter-story drift, which was caused by the larger long-period
ground motion of the two, was about 2%. The cumulative story drift exhibited by that wave was
about 25 relative to the yield drift, which was 15 times as large as that caused by the design
wave. In the 56 beam-to-column connections of the test structure, the moments and rotations of
24 beam-to-column connections were recorded in the test.
After the shaking by the original set of ground motions, the test specimen was shaken repeatedly
using the larger of the two long-period ground motions until fractures occurred in multiple connec-
tions. The shaking aimed at quantifying the seismic capacity of the connections. This paper presents
the major results and findings obtained from the series of shaking conducted for the quantification
of the capacity. First, the test specimen, detail of the adopted beam-to-column connections, and
loading program are introduced. Second, the seismic responses of the test specimen generated by
the sequential loading is presented in terms of the maximum inter-story drift angles. Third, the
effect of RC floor slab on the overall connection behavior is investigated by comparing the results
obtained from the tests with those of bare-beam tests conducted in the past. Last, the cumulative
ductility capacity of these connections is characterized in reference to the test results.
2. E-DEFENSE SHAKING TABLE TEST
2.1. Specifications of test specimen

A 21 story, 80 m height building was adopted as a prototype that represents the average properties of
existing high-rise buildings in Japan. To represent the seismic responses of the prototype building,
Copyright 䉷 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2011; 40:605–622
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
SEISMIC RESISTANCE CAPACITY OF BEAM–COLUMN CONNECTIONS 607
1450
1450
1500
3800
21850
3800
3800
4500
1150
6000 6000
Unit: mm 12000
Figure 1. E-Defense test specimen: (a) overview; (b) test specimen; and
(c) development of substitute layers.
a test method was developed that preserved the dimensions of structural members within the
loading capacity of the E-Defense shaking table. Figure 1(a) shows the overview of the test system.
The test specimen consists of a four-story, two-span by one-bay steel moment frame, and three
substitute layers are placed on top of the moment frame as shown in Figure 1(b). The substitute
layers, which consist of concrete slabs and rubber bearings, are arranged to represent the upper
portion of the prototype. The procedure to condense the upper portion and construct the substitute
layers is shown in Figure 1(c), and the detail is found in [24]. The test specimen has a plan
dimension of 12 m in the longitudinal direction and 8 m in the transverse direction, and is 21.9 m
in the total height. The first mode periods of the entire structure were 2.13 and 2.24 s in the
longitudinal and transverse directions. These values were obtained from a white-noise input with
the RMS of 0.6 m/s2 , 250 s in duration, and 0.2–20 Hz in frequency bandwidth. The detail of the
specimen and test setup is shown elsewhere [20, 24].
Figure 2 shows the two types of connection adopted in the test frame: the shop-welded connec-
tion and the field-welded connection. In Japanese high-rise buildings built in 1960s and early
1970s, shop-welded connections were often used due to the concerns about weld quality and weld
shrinkage. In such shop-welded connections, the beam is cut into halves in the mid span, and the
flanges and web of the half beam are all-welded to the column in the shop. Then, the shop-welded
assemblage that consists of a column and half beams is transported to the construction site. Finally,
the shop-welded half beams are bolted to each other at the mid span. With gradual development
of nondestructive testing, construction management, and accumulated experiences of welding, the
field-welded connection with welded flanges and bolted web gained popularity in the early 1970s.
Thus, these two types of connection were mixed in Japanese high-rise buildings constructed in
the early 1970s. With the advantages of better constructibility and lower cost, the field-welded
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Slab 7 35°
120
35
Column 35R
PL- 22
400
35
Upper side
600
35
H-400×200×8×13 35R
PL- 22 35
Column
H-600×200×9×19 Box-400×25 7 35°
(a) Bottom side
Slab Slab
120
120
735°
15
90
90
35
PL-22
560(@70×8) 7
560(@70×8)
Upper side
800
800
7 110
35° 70
150
150
PL-22
PL-9 PL-9
H-800×199×10×15 Bottom side
Box-400×25
(b)
Figure 2. Beam-to-column connection details (unit: mm): (a) shop-welded

connection and (b) field-welded connection.
connections were adopted for preference, but due to better quality control, the shop-welded connec-
tions were still used when the beam span was relatively short. Considering those situations at that
time, both types of connection were adopted in the test.
Figure 3 shows the typical plan of the specimen. In the longitudinal direction, a built-up wide
flange section of H 600×200×9×19 (the depth, width, web thickness, and flange thickness in
mm) was arranged with the shop-welded connection detail. In the transverse direction, a honey-
comb section of H 800×199×10×15, which was processed from a rolled section of H 596×
199×10×15, was arranged with the field-welded connection detail. The details of beams and
beam-to-column connections were chosen in reference to the design practice at the time of design.
Two types of web design were adopted in the field-welded connections (Figure 2(b)). One was a
then-typical design in which the web bolts were assumed to sustain only the beam shear force. The
other was a design in which the web bolts took both the shear force and partial bending moment
of the beam. The two connections turned out to have 9 and 13 bolts in the web, respectively.
The 9-bolt connection was arranged for the second and fourth floor beams and the 13-bolt design
was arranged for the third floor beams, respectively. In each of the second to fourth floors, eight
connections were chosen for detailed recording, which resulted in a total of 24 connections for
investigation of detailed hysteretic behavior.
The columns had a box section of 400×400×25 (the depth, width, and thickness in mm) with
inner diaphragms at the connection. The columns were designed to be stronger than beams by a
column-to-beam strength ratio of 1.5. RC floor slabs with a thickness of 120 mm were cast at every
floor. The first-story column bases were embedded in strong RC beam foundations for a depth of
0.9 m so that they were considered as fixed.
2.2. Loading program

Shaking table tests were conducted at three levels (levels 1 to 3) with increasing magnitudes of
input waves. Levels 1 and 2 correspond to the two levels of design earthquake load stipulated in
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Measured connection
Location of strain gauges
NR NL
H600 H400 Slab
B
WL ER 120
900 1600
h/3
H800
H400
H800
8000 h h/3
1600
h/3
WR EL
A Strain gauges
1000
H600 H400
SL SR Beam section
6000 6000 1000
1 2 3
Figure 3. Typical specimen plan and strain measurement (unit: mm).
the Japanese seismic design code [25]. Level 1 is for small to medium earthquakes with a PGA
ranging from 1.5 to 2 m/s2 , and the PGV is 0.25 m/s. Level 2 is for large earthquakes with the
PGA ranging from 3 to 4 m/s2 , and the PGV is 0.5 m/s. In Japanese seismic design, the 1940 El
Centro wave is commonly scaled to match the PGV of 0.25 and 0.5 m/s for levels 1 and 2. As
for long-period ground motions, two synthesized long-period ground motions, the Hog and San
waves, were adopted. The Hog wave was predicted at a Tokyo site, and a rupture of the Tokai
trough was supposed. The San wave was predicted at a Nagoya site, and simultaneous ruptures
of the Tokai and Tonankai troughs were supposed. Figure 4 shows the time histories and velocity
response spectra of the input waves. Waves were input in two horizontal directions. First, the level
1 El Centro wave was applied. Then, the level 2 El Centro wave (illustrated as El 0.5 m/s), Hog
wave, and the San wave were applied sequentially. After this loading, one-directional input of the
San wave, applied to the longitudinal direction, was applied two more times sequentially until a
few connections arranged in the longitudinal direction (shop-welded connections) fractured.
3. TEST RESULTS
3.1. Overall deformation

Figure 5 summarizes the maximum inter-story drift angle responses of the specimen under various
levels of ground motions. The responses of substitute layers are plotted at corresponding stories
of the 21-story prototype. Four field-welded connections, all located in the transverse direction,
fractured during the first San wave loading (San-1), and the maximum drift angle grew to 1.8% after
the fractures. Two shop-welded connections, both located in the longitudinal direction, fractured
during the third San wave loading (San-3), and the maximum drift angle grew to 2.2% after the
fractures. The test was terminated after the third San wave loading. Figure 6 shows the time
histories of the second-story drift angle in both the longitudinal and transverse directions, together
with the instants of first fractures.
3.2. Cumulative inter-story drift

Figure 7(a) shows the cumulative inter-story plastic drift angles obtained for the second story,
which sustained the maximum drift angles for all loading cases. Here, the cumulative inter-story
plastic drift angle was defined as the sum of plastic drift angles experienced during the loading
(see Figure 7(b)). The cumulative inter-story plastic drift angles, obtained after each ground
motion, were summed up to the first connection fracture in Figure 7(a). The first San wave
(San-1) generated cumulative inter-story plastic angles of 9.0 and 18.5% in the transverse and
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Longitudinal Transverse
El Centro-NS-0.5m /s El Centro-EW-0.5m /s
Acc. (m/s)
Acc. (m/s)
Hog-NS
Hog-EW
San-EW San-NS
0.1 0.1
0 100 200 300 0 100 200 300
(a) Sec Sec
Longitudinal Transverse
3 3
El Centro-NS-0.5m/s El Centro-EW-0.5m/s
Hog-NS Hog-EW
2 San-EW 2 San-NS
Sv(m/s)
Sv(m/s)
1 1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
(b) Period (Sec) Period (Sec)
Figure 4. Time histories and pseudo velocity spectra of input waves: (a) time histories
and (b) pseudo velocity spectra.
20 20 EL 0.25m /s Level 1
EL 0.5m /s
Level 2
15 Hog
15
San-1
Story
Story
San-2 Level 3
10 10 San-3
5 5
0 0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
(a) Drift (rad) (b) Drift (rad)
Figure 5. Maximum inter-story drift angles: (a) longitudinal direction and (b) transverse direction.
Figure 6. Time history of second story drift angle and instants of first fracture.
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Figure 7. Cumulative inter-story plastic drift angles: (a) cumulative inter-story plastic deformation ratio
and (b) definition of cumulative deformation.
longitudinal directions, respectively. The level 2 El Centro wave generated cumulative inter-story
plastic drift angles of 1% in both directions. It is notable that the long-period ground motion
generated 10 times or more the cumulative plastic deformation than what was expected by the design
wave.
After the 1994 Northridge earthquake, extensive analyses were conducted on the performance
of beam-to-column connections [5]. Based on numerous tests and analyses at that time, a standard
loading protocol for qualifying the performance of beam-to-column connections [26] was devel-
oped. According to the protocol, the loading history consists of six cycles each for drift angles
of 0.375, 0.5, and 0.75%, four cycles for drift angles of 1, and 2%, and two cycles each for drift
angles with an increment in drift angle of 1%. The tested connection is qualified if it sustains at
least 80% of the full plastic moment, b Mp , after the completion of at least one cycle of 4% drift
angle. In U.S. steel moment frames, the yield drift angle is commonly about 1%. With this yield
drift angle in mind, the cumulative inter-story plastic drift angle expected by the protocol reaches
52% at the end of loading with a drift angle of 4%. When looking into the cumulative inter-story
plastic drift angles obtained from the test, the first San wave generated about 20% in the cumulative
angle, and after two San waves, the cumulative inter-story plastic drift angle reached 53%. The
cumulative inter-story plastic drift angle stipulated by AISC, 52%, is close to this value. This
indicates that the criteria stipulated by AISC may be too stringent for the performance checking of
beam-to-column connections of high-rise buildings when they are subjected to long-period ground
motions.
3.3. Bending moment versus rotation relationship

Figures 8 and 9 show the bending moment versus rotation relationships of the 24 beam-to-column
connections. The responses of field-welded and shop-welded connections are presented for the first
and third San wave loadings (San-1 and San-3), respectively. The bending moment is normalized
by the full plastic moment, b Mp , of the bare beam, with the yield strength of the steel obtained
from the coupon test. The bending moment of the beam end was obtained by extrapolating the
bending moments measured in two cross-sections located in the mid portion of the beam (the
sections that were 1.6 m away from the column face), and the rotation was the angle measured
between the beam end and beam mid-span.
Locations of the recorded connections are shown in Figure 3. Field-welded connections fractured
at four locations. Three fractures (illustrated as EL in Figures 8(a),(b) and (c)) occurred at the
bottom flange at a rotation of about 0.007 rad, whereas the strength reached 1.1b Mp on the average.
The other fracture (illustrated as WL in Figure 8(c)) occurred at the bottom flange at a larger
rotation and strength of 0.012 rad and 1.3b Mp , respectively. In the positive bending, the resistance
decreased rapidly after the fracture, while the bolts connecting the shear plate and web remained
unfractured. During the succeeding negative bending, the fracture surface was closed, and the
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Figure 8. Hysteretic behavior of field-welded connections (San-1): (a) second floor connections; (b) third
floor connections; and (c) fourth floor connections.
Figure 9. Hysteretic behavior of shop-welded connections (San-3): (a) second floor connections; (b) third
floor connections; and (c) fourth floor connections.
resistance recovered. None of the shop-welded connections fractured during the first and second
San wave loadings (San-1 and San-2), and all connections exhibited stable behavior. During the
third San wave loading (San-3), two shop-welded connections fractured (Figures 9(a) and (b)).
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Column Web
Column
Flange
(a) (b)
Figure 10. Fractures in bottom flange: (a) field-welded connection and (b) shop-welded connection.
Two of the fracture surfaces, one from the field-welded connection and the other from the
shop-welded connection, are shown in Figure 10. In the field-welded connection, initial cracks
started from the toe of the weld access hole and grew to fracture along the weld boundary of the
bottom flange. In the shop-welded connection, cracks also started from the weld access hole and
grew to fracture in the flange metal.
3.4. Examination of fracture surfaces

In the field-welded connection, welders have to work on unstable scaffolds in a high altitude.
Owing to the presence of the beam web, welding at the bottom flange has to be interrupted at the
web, and the welder has to move to the other side of the beam to weld the next pass after he or
she finishes a pass in the front. In the shop-welded connection, all welds are applied in the shop.
The full penetration weld at the top flange is finished first; then the connection is overturned by
180◦ , and the weld of the bottom flange is applied in the same way as that of the top flange. Note
that welding in the bottom flange is not interrupted in the middle of the flange. The past tests
indicated that weld quality in this area could dominate the capacity of connections (for example,
Engelhardt and Husain [27]).
In the test, construction of the specimen and welds of the connections followed as closely
as possible to the actual situation for the construction in the field. The welders worked in an
altitude of about 15 m during cold and rather windy winter time. All welders were certified, and
all groove welds were ultrasonically tested and qualified by an independent welding-inspection
firm. Nonetheless, a fracture surface shown in Figure 11 was discovered after the test. In compar-
ison with the shop-welded fracture surface, which showed ductile fracture, multiple weld defaults
(incomplete fusion) were observed in the field-welded connection, particularly in the central
area, i.e. the vicinity of the toe of the weld access hole. These defaults were not detected
sufficiently in the ultrasonic tests. Microscopic examination was also conducted on the bottom
flange of an unfractured field-welded connection, with the results shown in Figure 12. No fault
was detected in the ultrasonic inspection, but small faults were present in the sections espe-
cially at the edge and middle of the flange, which corresponded to the start and ending in each
welding pass. Although it is called the field-welded connection, almost all previous laboratory tests
with the field-welded connections were fabricated in the laboratory, and not at high altitude. In
those tests, the ultrasonic inspection was also implemented in ideal conditions. The observations
presented here are based on this study only, and therefore caution is needed, but the results of
this test may suggest the difficulties in quantifying the difference in weld quality between the
actual site and the laboratory, and that the quality under actual conditions may be significantly
lower than what has been examined extensively in the laboratory. Ultrasonic tests were applied
by inspectors on unstable scaffolds at a high altitude which might have lessened the detection
accuracy.
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Incomplete fusion Ductile fracture surface

Fatigue failure and ductile fracture surface
(a)
(b)
Figure 11. Inspection of fractured cross-sections: (a) field-welded connection

and (b) shop-welded connection.
Figure 12. Microscopic examination of unfractured cross-sections: (a) bottom flange test piece (third floor,
ER); (b) Section A; (c) Section B; and (d) detail of Section B.
4. COMPOSITE EFFECT AND DEFORMATION CAPACITY
Composite effects in steel beams and connections have been examined in the past (for example,
[28–33]). In what follows, the effects are characterized in terms of stiffness increase, strength
increase, and strain concentration in the bottom flange.
4.1. Stiffness of composite beams

The natural frequencies of the test specimen were measured after each loading by the application
of white-noise shaking to the specimen. The white noise had a band-pass frequency of 0.2 to
20 Hz, a root mean square (RMS) magnitude of 0.2 m/s2 , and duration of 250 s. Note that the
excitation caused about 0.1% maximum drift angle at the test frame. The changes in the natural
period are shown in Figure 13 for both the longitudinal and transverse directions. The periods are
similar in both directions, with the initial natural period (before any loading) as 1.97 and 2.01 s in
the longitudinal and transverse directions. The periods are elongated continuously to 2.10, 2.11,
and 2.21 s (in the longitudinal direction) and 2.12, 2.13, and 2.34 s (in the transverse direction). A
rather drastic increase in the transverse direction after the San wave was due to the fractures of a
few connections.
The 24 connections measured in detail were installed with strain gauges placed vertically along
the beam cross-section, located 1.6 m away from the column face (Figure 3). For each cross-section,
the moment–curvature relationship was obtained using the data recorded from the white-noise
shaking, and the corresponding stiffness was estimated by curve-fitting. Figure 14 shows two
examples of the relationships. Figure 15(a) shows the stiffness values thus obtained for the 24
connections. Here, the values are normalized by the stiffness of the corresponding bare beam. The
normalized stiffness is 1.97 (in the longitudinal direction) and 1.81 (in the transverse direction)
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
2.5
Period (sec)
2.0
Longitudinal
Transverse
1.5
Initial Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
(El Centro) (El Centro) (San)
Loading
Figure 13. Changes in natural period of test specimen.
Figure 14. Moment–curvature relationship at beam section (1.6 m away from the column face): (a)
fourth-floor connection (NR) and (b) fourth-floor connection (EL).
on the average, with the coefficient of variation as 0.06 and 0.05, respectively. It is notable that
the stiffness values are very uniform. In four connections out of 24, another cross-section closer
to the column face and therefore yielding more significantly, located 0.9 m away from the column
face, was also installed with strain gauges. The stiffness values in the cross-section are plotted in
Figure 15(a), which indicates that they are also very close to those obtained for the cross-section
farther by 1.6 m. Figure 15(b) show similar plots, but this time for the stiffness after the level
1 El Centro wave. The stiffness values are again very uniform among the connections, with the
average and coefficient of variation as 1.45 and 0.05 (in the longitudinal direction) and 1.41 and
0.02 (in the transverse direction). Figure 16 summarizes the changes in stiffness after each loading.
It is notable that the averaged stiffness decreased rather significantly, originally from 1.9 down
to 1.1 after the San wave, and the growth of cracks present in the RC floor slabs was primarily
responsible for the reduction.
An associated numerical analysis was conducted to examine the correlation between the reduc-
tion in beam stiffness and the natural period. The numerical model adopted member-to-member
representation, whereas all members were assumed as elastic. First, the nominal geometric proper-
ties were assigned in the model, and the composite action with RC floor slabs was allowed for by
adopting a factor of 1.9 for the beam stiffness (in reference to Figure 15(a)). Young’s modulus of
the steel was then slightly adjusted so that the fundamental natural period in the initial stage would
match the experimentally obtained natural period. The same model was repeatedly analyzed for the
natural period, each time using a different factor for the beam stiffness in reference to Figure 16.
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Longitudinal Transverse Longitudinal Transverse

3 3
Beam Beam
end Mid-span end Mid-span
(0.9m)
Stiffness ratio
Stiffness ratio
(1.6m) (0.9m) (1.6m)
2 2
1 1
4F
WL 4F
3F
WL 3F
4F
NR 4F
3F
NR 3F
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WL
WL
WL
WL
WL
WL
NR
NR
NR
WL
WL
NR
NR
NR
NR
SR
NR
ER
SR
SR
SR
ER
ER
ER
ER
ER
SR
SR
NL
EL
NL
NL
EL
SL
EL
NL
NL
NL
EL
EL
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
EL
0 0
2F 3F 4F 2F 3F 4F 2F 3F 4F 2F 3F 4F
(a) Measured location (b) Measured location
Figure 15. Stiffness ratios of composite beams: (a) response before test and (b) response after
level 1 El Centro wave loading.
3
Stiffness ratio
1
Longitudinal
Transverse
0
Loading
Figure 16. Changes in flexural stiffness of composite beams.
Thus obtained natural periods are plotted in Figure 17, together with the corresponding periods
obtained experimentally. The correlation between the two is reasonable, except for the transverse
direction after the San wave. The discrepancy was because of the fractures of four connections
during the San wave. The observations in this section suggest that the natural period of steel frames
can change rather significantly although the steel itself is known to recover its original stiffness
even after yielding, and this is primarily due to the damage (cracks) induced in the RC floor slabs
and resultant reduction in composite action.
4.2. Strength increase

Figure 18 summarizes the experienced maximum positive bending strengths of all connections. Two
past bare-beam tests without floor slab, both of which had an identical beam size (H 800×199×
10×15) and of weld access hole detail with those of the field-welded connection of E-Defense
test [34, 35] are also included. The normalized strengths of the bare beams and unfractured field-
welded connection of the E-Defense specimen are at about 1.0 and 1.3b Mp on the average. The
composite beam action exhibited a strength increase on the order of 30% over the corresponding
bare beams. Among the field-welded connections, 1 of the 4 connections with 13 bolts and 3
of the 8 connections with 9 bolts fractured. In the design of the connection with nine bolts, the
maximum flexural strength carried by the web was controlled by the shear strength of the bolts.
When 13 bolts were arranged, the maximum strength was controlled by the strength of the shear
plate. The connection was stronger by 8% than the connection with nine bolts, while the test
indicated that among the fractured connections the connection with 13 bolts had strength greater
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
2.5
Period (sec)
2.0
Experiment (Longitudinal)
Experiment (Transverse)
Numerical model (Longitudinal)
Numerical model (Transverse)

1.5
Loading
Figure 17. Comparison in natural period between test and numerical analysis in which
composite action is considered.
Composite beams Unfractured Fractured

3
Y: Yamada (H 800) K: Kitamura (H 800)
Field-welded Shop-welded
E-Defense specimen
2
M/bMp
1
WR
WR
WR
WL
WL
WL
NR
NR
NR
ER
SR
SR
SR
ER
ER
NL
NL
NL
EL
SL
SL
EL
EL
SL
0 Y K
2F 3F 4F 2F 3F 4F
Connections
Figure 18. Maximum strength of connections.
by 5% than those with 9 bolts. As shown later, the cumulative plastic rotation of the fractured
connections remained nearly unchanged. Overall, the supplemental bolts had a minimal effect on
the improvement of performance.
The average strength of the fractured and unfractured field-welded connections are 1.1 and
1.3b Mp . For the shop-welded connections, the averaged values are 1.30 and 1.31, respectively. The
shop-welded connections show more stable performance, and although the connections fractured,
this occurred after they underwent stronger input.
4.3. Strain concentration

Figure 19 shows the strains at the bottom flange, measured at a location 40 mm farther from the
column face and for various beam rotations. Strains are plotted for positive bending, i.e. when the
bottom flange sustained tension. Relationships of the maximum strain and rotation are significantly
different between the previous two bare tests (without RC floor slabs) and the E-Defense test. The
strains without the RC floor slab are about 1.5% on the average at a rotation of 0.017 rad (drift
angle of 1.8%), whereas that with RC floor slab exceeds 3% at a much smaller rotation of 0.012 rad
(drift angle of about 1.4%). The strain at the bottom flange was amplified over two times by the
presence of RC floor slabs, and this was apparently due to the upward shift of the neutral axis in
the positive bending.
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Figure 19. Growth of bottom flange strains.
4.4. Cumulative plastic rotation

Cumulative plastic rotations obtained from the tests are summarized in Figure 20. The values
shown in Figure 20(a) were the summation of the cumulative plastic rotations obtained from the
level 2 El Centro wave, the Hog wave, and the San waves up to the fracture. Figures 20(b) and (c)
present the values generated by the single events of the El Centro level 2 and the first San wave
loading (San-1), respectively.
In Figure 20(a), the cumulative plastic rotations show a large scatter in the field-welded connec-
tions, primarily because fractured connections are included. The averaged cumulative plastic rota-
tion of the four fractured E-Defense connection was 0.16 rad, which was only about half of that
of the connections without RC floor slabs [34, 35]. The shop-welded connections experienced the
San wave for three times. The averaged cumulative ductility ratios of fractured and unfractured
shop-welded connections are 0.86 and 0.93 rad, respectively. The shop-welded connections show
notably more stable performance in the cumulative plastic rotation.
Kim et al. [36] conducted a series of tests on shop-welded connections with and without RC floor
slabs. The specimen with the slab exhibited strains at the bottom flange two times larger than those
observed in the bare beam. Strain concentrations reduced the maximum and cumulative plastic
deformation capacity by about 50% of that of the corresponding bare beam. These observations
are similar to what was examined in this study.
A series of beam-to-column connections tests were conducted on various types of connec-
tions with and without RC floor slabs after the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Engelhardt et al.
[37] conducted tests using the reduced beam sections (RBSs) for seismic rehabilitation of the
pre-Northridge steel moment connections. The results indicated that the RBS bare-beams spec-
imen buckled at a 0.03 rad plastic beam rotation, and the strength was reduced to less than
80% of b Mp . The same beam but with a slab buckled later, and the composite beam was able
to sustain a 0.04 rad rotation and absorb at least two times more energy than the bare beam.
Uang et al. [38] conducted a series of tests on haunch connections with and without RC floor
slabs. The tests focused on the retrofit and early time weld material (E70T-4) was applied on
groove welding of the flanges. Two bare-beam specimens fractured at the top flange under a
0.008 and 0.015 rad plastic rotations. The composite specimens were able to stably sustain a
0.027 rad plastic rotation and to absorb at least two times more energy than the corresponding
bare beams. The haunch connections showed lower ductility than similar connections tested
by Engelhardt et al., in which new connections instead of retrofit connections were examined.
In both cases, the slab was found effective in delaying beam instability and enhancing the
ductility.
As discussed above, the floor slab contributes to the enhancement of ductility sometimes, but
other times it becomes a factor that reduces the ductility. When the connection, i.e. the toe of
the bottom flange weld access hole, is the weakest spot, the floor slab seems to make the spot
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
Composite beams Unfractured Fractured

Definition
Y: Yamada (H 800) K: Kitamura (H 800) M (kN m)
1.5 E-Defense specimen 3rd cycle 1st cycle
1.0
2rd cycle
0.5
WL
EL
EL
EL
WR
WR
WR
WL
WL
NR
NR
NR
ER
SR
SR
ER
ER
SR
NL
NL
NL
SL
SL
SL
Y K
0
2F 3F 4F 2F 3F 4F
(a) Connections
Unfractured Fractured
0.5
0.25
SR
SR
SR
WR
SL
WR
WR
SL
WL
WL
NR
ER
NR
SL
ER
NL
WL
NR
EL
EL
ER
NL
EL
NL
0
2F 3F 4F 2F 3F 4F
(b) Connections
Unfractured Fractured
0.5
0.25
WR
WR
WR
WL
WL
WL
NR
NR
NR
SR
ER
SR
ER
ER
SR
NL
NL
NL
SL
EL
EL
SL
SL
EL
0
2F 3F 4F 2F 3F 4F
(c) Connections
Figure 20. Cumulative plastic rotations of connections: (a) cumulative plastic rotation (up to fractures);
(b) cumulative plastic rotation (El Centro); and (c) cumulative plastic rotation (San).
even more vulnerable due to the promotion of tensile strain at that spot. When the weakest spot
is moved away from the connection and located in the beam section, the floor slab serves as a
restrainer to delay the beam instability.
Within the 12 field-welded and 12 shop-welded connections, the field-welded and shop-welded
connections fractured in four and two locations, respectively. The average cumulative plastic
rotations of those fractured connections were 0.16 and 0.86 rad, respectively. Considering these
8
numbers, 67% (= 12 ) of the field-welded connections can sustain the cumulative plastic rotation
over 0.16 rad, and 85% (= 10 12 ) of the shop-welded connections can sustain cumulative plastic
rotations over 0.86 rad. In Figures 20(b) and (c), the averaged cumulative rotations of the unfractured
connections (including both the field-welded and shop-welded connections) were 0.035 and 0.23 rad
under the level 2 El Centro and San waves, respectively. In comparison with the rotation demands
required for the two waves, the minimum capacity of the field-welded connections (0.16 rad)
fell in between. The long-period ground motion demanded a 1.5 times larger cumulative plastic
rotation than the minimum capacity, whereas it was about five times larger than the demand
required for the design wave. For the shop-welded connection, on the other hand, the minimum
capacity (0.86 rad) was four times larger than the demand required for the long-period ground
motion.
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
5. CONCLUSIONS
A series of shaking table tests were conducted on a full-scale test structure that represented
high-rise buildings. A large shaking table, called E-Defense, was used in the test. Two types
of connections having the connection details commonly used in the 1970s, the early days of
high-rise construction in Japan, were adopted: the field-welded connection consisting of welded
unreinforced flanges and a bolted web type and the shop-welded connection in which the flanges
and web are all-welded to the column flange in the shop. To assess the seismic capacity of a
total of 24 beam-to-column connections of the specimen, particularly when it is subjected to long-
period ground motion, characterized not so much by large amplitude but by very many cycles of
repeated loading, the test specimen was shaken repeatedly until the connections fractured. Based
on the test, the seismic capacity of those connections was examined in terms of the ductility
capacity and the effect of RC floor slabs. The major findings obtained from this study are as
follows:
1. Long-period, long-duration ground motion generated cumulative inter-story plastic deforma-

tions that are more than 10 times greater than what is expected in the contemporary seismic
design.
2. Between the two types of beam-to-column connection adopted in the test, i.e. the field-
welded connection and the shop-welded connection, the field-welded connection tended to
have lower ductility, particularly in terms of the cumulative ductility. According to the test
results of the 24 connections recorded in detail, the field-welded connection had a cumulative
plastic capacity of 0.16 rad at 67% probability, whereas the shop-welded connection had a
cumulative plastic capacity of 0.86 rad at 85% probability.
3. In comparison with the rotation demands of the design wave and long-period ground motion,
i.e. 0.035 and 0.23 rad, the minimum capacity of the field-welded connections (0.16 rad) fell
in between. The long-period ground demanded 1.5 times larger cumulative plastic rotation
than that of the minimum capacity. The minimum capacity was about five times larger than
the demand of the design wave. For the shop-welded connection, on the other hand, the
minimum capacity (0.86 rad) was four times larger than the demand of the long-period ground
motion.
4. The fracture surfaces of the field-welded connections included some weld defects, particularly
around the toe of the beam bottom flange. Difficulties in ensuring the weld and inspection
performance in the field were believed to be responsible for the defects and the eventual
smaller ductility.
5. The presence of RC floor slabs increased the beam initial stiffness by about 90% from
what was estimated for the bare beam. The stiffness steadily decreased after each loading.
Cracks developed in the RC floor slab were responsible for the decrease. The test specimen’s
foundational natural period was elongated constantly after each major shaking, initially from
2.0 to 2.34 s after the first San wave loading in which a few connections fractured. The
elongation corresponded to the reduction of the beam stiffness.
6. Comparing with the past bare-beam test results, the presence of RC floor slabs exhibited a
strength increase on the order of 30% and increased the strain concentration at the toe of
the bottom flange to more than two times. The high strain concentration promoted fractures
after initial cracks and led to a decrease in the cumulative plastic rotation of the fractured
connections to about half of those of the corresponding bare beams.
The next series of full-scale shaking table test was recently completed for the identical test
specimen but this time with various retrofit methods. They included the addition of buckling-
restrained braces, addition of oil dampers, and strengthening of beam-to-column connections. As
for the last retrofit method, connections were strengthened by the attachment of a pair of horizontal
haunches (wing plates) at the bottom flange, attachment of a vertical haunch (a rectangular section)
beneath the bottom flange, and supplemental welds at the shear tab. The performance of the
retrofitted test specimen is a subject to report in succeeding papers.
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science &
Technology (MEXT) to carry out the test presented in this paper. The authors thank Kunio Fukuyama and
Kouichi Kajiwara of National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention for designing
the test specimen and gathering the experimental data used herein. The authors would also like to thank
the reviewers for their valuable commons and suggestions.
REFERENCES
1. Kamae K, Kawabe H, Irikura K. Strong ground motion prediction for huge subduction earthquakes using a
characterized source model and several simulation techniques. Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2004; No. 655.
2. Kawabe H, Kaname K, Irikura K. Damage prediction of long-period structures during subduction earthquakes—
part 1: long-period ground motion prediction in the Osaka basin for future Nankai Earthquakes. Proceedings of
the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 2008; P291.
3. Japan Society of Civil Engineering, Architectural Institute of Japan. Report of Seismic Performance Improvement
of Civil, Architectural Structures Subjected to Long-period Ground Motions Generated by Subduction Zone, 2006
(in Japanese).
4. Suita K, Kitamura Y, Goto T, Iwata T, Kamae K. Seismic response of high-rise buildings constructed in 1970s
subjected to long-period ground motions—using predicted ground motions from hypothetical Nankai trough
earthquakes in Kansai area. Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, Architectural Institute of Japan
2007; 611:055–061 (in Japanese with English abstract).
5. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment-frame
buildings, FEMA350, July 2000.
6. Bertero VV, Anderson JC, Krawinkler H. Performance of steel building structures during the Northridge earthquake.
Report No. UCB/EERC-94/09, EERC, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 1994.
7. Nakashima M, Roeder CW, Maruoka Y. Steel moment frames for earthquakes in United Stated and Japan. Journal
of Structural Engineering 2000; 126(8):861–868.
8. Wang T, Yoshitake N, Pan P, Lee TH, Nakashima M. Numerical characteristics of peer-to-peer (P2P) internet
online hybrid test system and its application to seismic simulation of SRC structure. Journal of Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37(2):265–282.
9. Wang T, McCormick J, Yoshitake N, Pan P, Murata Y, Nakashima M. Collapse simulation of a four-story steel
moment frame by a distributed online hybrid test. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics
2008; 37(6):955–974.
10. Pan P, Tada M. Hybrid formulation of operator splitting (OS) and Newmark- methods for collaborative structural
analysis (CSA). Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37(7):1117–1133.
11. Yang TY, Stojadinovic B, Moehle J. Hybrid simulation of a zipper-braced steel frame under earthquake excitation.
Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2009; 38(1):95–113.
12. Hung CC, El-Tawil S. A method for estimating specimen tangent stiffness for hybrid simulation. Journal of
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2009; 38(1):115–134.
13. Stavridis A, Shing PB. Hybrid testing and modeling of a suspended zipper steel frame. Journal of Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2010; 39(2):187–209.
14. Ahmadizadeh M, Mosqueda G, Reinhorn AM. Compensation of actuator delay and dynamics for real-time hybrid
structural simulation. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37(1):21–42.
15. Mercan O, Ricles JM. Stability analysis for real-time pseudodynamic and hybrid pseudodynamic testing with
multiple sources of delay. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37(10):1269–1293.
16. Bonnet PA, Williams MS, Blakeborough A. Evaluation of numerical time-integration schemes for real-time hybrid
testing. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37(13):1467–1490.
17. Chen C, Ricles JM, Marullo TM, Mercan O. Real-time hybrid testing using the unconditionally stable explicit
CR integration algorithm. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2009; 38(1):23–44.
18. Chen C, Ricles JM. Improving the inverse compensation method for real-time hybrid simulation through a dual
compensation scheme. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2009; 38(10):1237–1255.
19. Weng YT, Tsai KC, Chen PC, Chou CC, Chan YR, Jhuang SJ, Wang YY. Seismic performance evaluation of a
34-story steel building retrofitted with response modification elements. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics 2009; 38(6):759–781.
20. Chung YL, Nagae T, Fukuyama K, Kajiwara K, Inoue T, Hitaka T, Nakashima M. Seismic resistance capacity
of high-rise buildings subjected to long-period ground motions—E-Defense shaking table test. Proceeding of the
14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 2008; No. 95.
21. Ogawa N, Ohtani K, Katayama T, Shibata H. Construction of a three-dimensional, large-scale shaking table and
development of core technology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 2001; 359:1725–1751.
22. Nakashima M. Roles of large structural testing for the advance of earthquake engineering. Proceedings of the
14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 2008; K009.
DOI: 10.1002/eqe
23. Ji X, Kajiwara K, Nagae T, Enokida R, Nakashima M. A substructure shaking table test for reproduction of
earthquake responses of high-rise buildings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2009;
38(12):1381–1399.
24. Chung YL, Nagae T, Hitaka T, Nakashima M. Seismic resistance capacity of high-rise buildings subjected
to long-period ground motions: E-Defense shaking table test. Journal of Structural Engineering 2010; 136(6):
637–644.
25. Nakashima M, Inoue K, Tada M. Classification of damage to steel buildings observed in the 1995 Hyogoken–
Nanbu earthquake. Journal of Engineering Structures 1998; 20(4–6):271–281.
26. American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings, March 2005.
27. Engelhardt MD, Husain AS. Cyclic loading performance of welded flange-bolted web connections. Journal of
Structural Engineering 1993; 119(12):3537–3550.
28. Lee SJ, Lu LW. Cyclic tests of full-scale composite joint subassemblages. Journal of Structural Engineering
1989; 115(8):1977–1998.
29. Hajjar JF, Leon RT, Gustafson MA, Shield CK. Seismic response of composite moment-resisting connections.
II: behavior. Journal of Structural Engineering 1998; 124(8):877–885.
30. Leon RT, Hajjar JF, Gustafson M. Seismic response of composite moment-resisting-resisting connections.
I: performance. Journal of Structural Engineering 1998; 124(8):868–876.
31. Civjan SA, Engelhardt MD, Gross JL. Slab effects in SMRF retrofit connection tests. Journal of Structural
Engineering 2001; 127(3):230–237.
32. Nakashima M, Matsumiya T, Suita K, Zhou F. Full-scale test of composite frame under large cyclic loading.
Journal of Structural Engineering 2007; 133(2):297–304.
33. Abe K. Test and simulation of complete collapse of structures. Joint Research Report of NIED and Kyoto
University, March 2009; 50 (in Japanese).
34. Yamada S, Kitamura Y, Suita K, Nakashima M. Experiment investigation on deformation capacity of beam-
to-column connections in early highrise buildings by fullscale tests. Journal of Structural and Construction
Engineering, Architectural Institute of Japan 2008; 623:119–126 (in Japanese with English abstract).
35. Kitamura Y, Hashida I, Suita K. Seismic performance and retrofit of beam-column connection for early high-rise
buildings, part 1: experimental method and hysteresis characteristics. Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual
Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, Hiroshima, Japan, 2008; 1001–1002 (in Japanese).
36. Kim YJ, Oh SH, Moon TS. Seismic behavior and retrofit of steel moment connections considering slab effects.
Journal of Engineering Structures 2004; 26(13):1993–2005.
37. Engelhardt MD, Fry GT, Jones SL, Venti M, Holliday SD. Experimental investigation of reduced beam
section connections with composite slabs. Proceedings; Fourth US–Japan Workshop on Steel Fracture Issues,
San Francisco, 28 February–1 March 2000.
38. Uang CM, Yu QS, Noel A, Gross J. Cyclic testing of steel moment connections rehabilitated with RBS or welded
haunch. Journal of Structural Engineering 2000; 126(1):057–068.
DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Earthquake

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Earthquake

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2011; 40:605–622

Seismic resistance capacity of beam–column connections

Yu-Lin Chung1, ∗, † , Takuya Nagae2 , Tomohiro Matsumiya3 and Masayoshi Nakashima1

Received 7 February 2010; Revised 2 June 2010; Accepted 4 June 2010

Copyright 䉷 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

2. E-DEFENSE SHAKING TABLE TEST

2.1. Specifications of test specimen

Figure 2. Beam-to-column connection details (unit: mm): (a) shop-welded

2.2. Loading program

Figure 3. Typical specimen plan and strain measurement (unit: mm).

3.1. Overall deformation

3.2. Cumulative inter-story drift

3.3. Bending moment versus rotation relationship

3.4. Examination of fracture surfaces

Incomplete fusion Ductile fracture surface

Figure 11. Inspection of fractured cross-sections: (a) field-welded connection

4. COMPOSITE EFFECT AND DEFORMATION CAPACITY

4.1. Stiffness of composite beams

Figure 13. Changes in natural period of test specimen.

Longitudinal Transverse Longitudinal Transverse

Figure 16. Changes in flexural stiffness of composite beams.

4.2. Strength increase

Numerical model (Transverse)

Composite beams Unfractured Fractured

Figure 18. Maximum strength of connections.

4.3. Strain concentration

Figure 19. Growth of bottom flange strains.

4.4. Cumulative plastic rotation

Composite beams Unfractured Fractured

1. Long-period, long-duration ground motion generated cumulative inter-story plastic deforma-

You might also like