Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Can Precast Concrete Structures Be Designed As Semi-Rigid Frames? Part 1 - The Experimental Evidence
Can Precast Concrete Structures Be Designed As Semi-Rigid Frames? Part 1 - The Experimental Evidence
net/publication/290742364
CITATIONS READS
44 874
5 authors, including:
Marcelo Ferreira
Universidade Federal de São Carlos
30 PUBLICATIONS 198 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Marcelo Ferreira on 29 March 2022.
Fig 2. (left)
Precast concrete frame
using beam-to-column
corbel connections
and beam-to-column
head connections
(Courtesy Blatcon Ltd,
UK)
Fig 3. (right)
Precast concrete
permanent formwork
to receive reinforced
cast in situ infill to form
monolithic connection
(Courtesy New Zealand
prestress, thermal movement, creep and shrinkage. In seismic Concrete Society)
regions precast concrete elements are used to form fully rigid
connections by making reinforced cast in situ cruciform joints, as
shown in Fig 3 where the precast element is used as permanent
shuttering. Many of the inherent advantages of speed and struc- ness, the maximum bending moment at the foundation to each
tural efficiency in a precast concrete structure are lost due to the column is the sum of the sway moments, ΣHihi/n, and the P-∆
considerable quantities of in situ concrete and site placed rein- moment ΣPiau accumulated over the full height of the structure.
forcement required. Attempts to form moment resisting The sway deflection au is dependent on the effective length of the
connections using mechanical fasteners,such as steel cleats,bolted column. Unlike structural steelwork, where the rotational stiff-
brackets or welded plates, etc. have not been wholly successful, ness of beam-to-column connections influences the magnitude of
often because of a need to provide tensile resistance in the bottom au, current precast concrete design practice ignores the presence
of the beam. The result is that pinned joints at beam to column of beam-to-column connections in such a way that sway moments
connections are preferred from both a design and construction in the column may not be distributed to the beams.
point of view. BS 8110:19851 is particularly harsh on column effective length
In design, three dimensional precast structures are simplified factors in unbraced precast frames. The ratio αc of the flexural
as 2-d frames.The in-plane structural system in Fig 4a comprises stiffness of the column to that of a precast beam is taken as 10,
solely of beams and columns. Floor slabs, in the out-of-plane direc- Fig 4. resulting in an effective length factor for the column of β = 2.3. For
tion, do not contribute to the flexural stiffness or strength of the Schematic precast example, in a 10m high column of 300 × 300 mm cross section the
beams unless they are specifically designed as composite beams. skeletal frames. (a) In- second order deflection au, according to BS 8110, Part 1, eq. 32 &
Sway deflections for such a pinned and rigid plane frame are plane sway in pinned 34, is a staggering 880mm! This clearly results in an impractical
shown in Figs 4a and 4b. In the perpendicular direction in Fig 4c jointed frame. (b) In- size of columns. Although many precast concrete designers know
no frame action is possible because the precast floors are simply plane sway in rigid this method of design as being very conservative, refinement has
supported on beams. frame. (c) Out-of-plane not taken place due to a lack of data on the flexural properties of
The resistance to horizontal load and second order P-∆ deflec- torsional mode in beam-to-column connections. It is reasonable to accept that the
tions in the pinned jointed unbraced structures shown in Fig 4 is pinned jointed frame. flexural properties of a mechanical connection containing only a
provided solely by the cantilever action of the columns. Referring (d) In-plane sway in precast beam will be very limited, and indeed research by Mahdi2
to Fig 4a, assuming that n number columns are all of equal stiff- semi-rigid frame has shown this to be the case, especially where a sagging moment
4a 4b
4c 4d
Fig 5. (above) Aspects of this work have been previously published by the
Continuity tie steel authors7,8,9, and by others on items (iii) and (iv)10,11.The analytical
bars placed in the floor techniques presented in Part 2 enable calculation of connection
zone acts compositely strength and stiffness, and the effective length of columns in the
with the precast beam format of modified BS 8110 equations.
Fig 6. (right)
Types of precast Concept of semi-rigidity
concrete beam-to- The response of a frame to bending moments will be greatly influ-
column connectors. (a) enced by the rotational behaviour of the connections, in particu-
Welded plate (b) Billet lar the beam – column connection. Shear and/or axial forces may
(c) Single cleat (d) have a small beneficial or deleterious effect, but these are gener-
Double cleat ally ignored. Deformations in precast connections are known to be
influenced by many effects, particularly those involving an assem-
bly of welded plates, grouted dowels or bolted brackets – the
(tension at the bottom) is acting. But when the floor slab, together majority of which contain precast-to-precast or precast-to-in situ
with stability tie bars, cast in situ topping and the cast in situ infill interfaces.When subjected to a hogging bending moment M,defor-
around the ends of the slabs (see Fig 5) are taken into account it mations at the interfaces compress the concrete locally at the
is obvious that the connection must possess appreciable flexural bottom whilst tensile strains open the interfaces at the top, result-
strength and rotational stiffness. It would seem reasonable to ing in a rigid body rotation φ of the end of the beam relative to the
assume that if a precast concrete connection behaved in a semi- column, as shown in Fig 9.
rigid manner, its finite strength and stiffness could be harnessed The connection is classified as ‘semi rigid’ and its behaviour is
to enhance the global stiffness of the structure.
The increased stiffness of the connection has the effect of reduc- 6a
ing αc (by apparently increasing the stiffness of the beam) and
hence reducing β. In allowing the continuity of in plane bending
moments the sway profile of the frame will be as shown in Fig 4d.
The stiffness of the connection not only has an effect on the sway
profile of the structure, and hence on the serviceability limit of
deflection, but also on the ultimate load capacity of the column. It
is therefore necessary that the connection possesses sufficient
strength, stiffness and ductility to ensure that a premature failure
will not occur in the connection. Columns may be then designed
for each successive storey using the appropriate β factor, provid-
ing that the beam end moment is less than the moment capacity 6b
MRC of the connection at the end of the beam.
The connections used at beam to column joints vary widely in
the precast industry.This was due,in part,to patented connections
in the 1960s and 70s, which stifled the widespread use of the
most efficient types of connections and led to the proliferation of
new, or novel, types of connections3. Fig 6 shows a range of
connections that would be classified as pinned during the
construction phase, but on completion would generate flexural
strength and rotational stiffness in responding to imposed gravity
and wind loads. Because large shear forces and bending moments
will inevitably be transmitted to the columns and floor units,
possibly leading to cracking (Fig 72) or crack widening (Fig 84), it
was necessary to undertake new research to increase the under-
standing of the rotational behaviour of precast concrete 6c
connections.
Collaborative projects were established at Nottingham 2,4, City5
and Southampton6 Universities, funded by the EPSRC and a
number of UK precast concrete frame manufacturers. The full
scale tests reported in this paper were carried out at Nottingham
and City by different research teams. The aim of the work was to
find out if a precast skeletal sway frame could be designed (and
constructed) using semi rigid flexural connections, and to provide
engineers with bona fide test data, empirical design equations and
a semi rigid frame analysis computer program.
This was done in four stages:
• to determine the rotational behaviour of full scale precast
concrete beam to column connections subjected to hogging
and/or sagging, cyclical and monotonic flexural loading. 6d
• to determine the ultimate load in unbraced frames containing
rigid, pinned and semi-rigid connections and thus propose
parametric equations for column effective length factors.
• to develop a finite element model of some of the connections
tested under item (i) to enable a wider range of joint geometry
and material properties to be studied.
• to propose a method for the design of columns in semi-rigid
frames, and validate the output using a 3-dimensional frame
analysis computer program.
11a above) and part dry packed.The connection therefore contains two
precast-in situ interfaces.
The double cleat connector comprises a load bearing (seating)
cleat and a top locating cleat. The former is made using a rolled
structural angle section.The level of the top of the seating cleat is
at 140mm from the bottom of the beam. A steel plate in the end
of the beam ensures a positive bearing through which a 16mm
diameter grade 8:8 threaded dowel is secured to a stiffened locat-
ing cleat at 110mm from the top of the beam.The seating cleat and
the locating cleat are pre bolted to the column using 25mm diam-
eter grade 4:6 threaded (to M24) dowels that pass through the
column. The connection is completed in the same manner as the
billet connection, and therefore contains two precast-insitu inter-
faces.
A schedule of tests is given in Tables 1 and 2, respectively, for a
range of single sided (one beam and one column) and double sided
(two beams and one column) tests.The connections were designed
11b 11c and manufactured by casting a reinforcing cage (or steel sections
called a ‘shear box’) in the ends of the beams to provide 200kN
vertical shear capacity.The beams were reinforced symmetrically,
i.e. top steel = bottom steel. The columns were reinforced using
four T32 bars at a centroidal cover of 50mm. Full details of the
connections are available in the literature2,4,5. Match cast precast
concrete and infill mortar/concrete cubes and axial tension rebar
testing provided the mean values for the strength of the precast
concrete fcu, in situ infill concrete fcui and rebars fy, given in Tables
1 and 2.
Using the as-tested material data, the calculated moment of
11d 11e resistance of the column, ignoring axial forces, was about 175
kNm (fcu and fy varied in different columns).Thus the total design
moment of resistance in the connector was twice this figure, i.e.
350kNm. (When BS 8110 partial safety factors are included this
reduces to 320Nm.) The design moment of resistance of the beams
MR was calculated according to the BS 8110 stress block method
using the as-tested material data without partial safety factors,
e.g. for test beam B1, b = 300mm, d = 250mm, As = 1608mm2, fcu
= 57.2N/mm2 and fy = 520 N/mm2.Then Fs = 520 × 1608 = 836kN;
x = 81mm; z = 250 – 0.45 × 81 = 214mm; MR = 836 × 0.214 =
Fig 11. connection contains one precast-precast interface. 178.6kNm. Values for MR are given in Tables 3 and 4.
Cruciform sub- The single cleat connector comprises a seating cleat of rolled The moment capacity of the connector MRC is calculated at the
assemblies for beam- structural tee section, for example cut from a 457 × 152 × 72 face of the column.The internal lever arm z is the resultant of the
to-column connection Universal Beam, gusseted for strength, and pre-fixed to the various horizontal forces, which, depending on the type of connec-
tests. (a) Location of column face using four M24 HSFG bolts. Two M24 grade 4.6 site tor are due to the weld, threaded dowel, fixing bolts, locating cleats
sub-assemblies and bolts connect through a steel plate in the beam to slotted holes in and, in the case of the floor slabs, the reinforcing tie bars. There
loading regimes. (b) the cleat.The level of the seating is 140mm from the bottom of the may be two, or three, component forces acting. It is assumed that
Single sided beam beam. Infill grade C40 expansive mortar is gravity fed into the the forces contribute exclusively to the moment capacity, that
only. (c) Single sided rectangular space beneath the cleat, which is lightly reinforced they attain their yield strength, and no local bending effects, for
with floor slab. (d) with R8 loops. The 30mm gap above the cleat is part filled (as example along the length of the weld,are acting.It is also assumed
Double sided beam
only, sway loading. (e) Table 2: Dimensions and material data for double sided sway and gravity load tests
Double sided with Test Loading Beam and Distance to As top & Effective As Effective Beam Infill Bars
floor slab, sway or ref mode slab section1 point load2 bottom depth to bars depth to cube cube yield
gravity loading b x h + hs bars beam bars in slab slab bars strength3 strength3,4 strength3
d ds fcu fcui fy
(mm) (mm) (mm2) (mm) (mm2) (mm) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2)
B8a sway sagging 300 x 300 2365 1608 250 55.2 42.2 520
B8b sway hogging 300 x 300 2365 1608 250 55.2 42.2 520
W8a sway sagging 300 x 300 2365 1608 250 54.8 45.1 520
W8b sway hogging 300 x 300 2365 1608 250 54.8 45.1 520
SC1a sway sagging 300 x 300 2365 1608 250 58.2 44.3 520
SC1b sway hogging 300 x 300 2365 1608 250 58.2 44.3 520
B9a gravity 300 x 300 2365 1608 250 982 450 48.4 46.4/27.8 518
+200 slab
B9b gravity 300 x 300 2365 1256 250 982 450 50.3 46.4/27.8 518
+ 200 slab
W9a gravity 300 x 300 2365 1256 250 982 450 50.4 45.4/33.8 518
+ 200 slab
W9b gravity 300 x 300 2365 1256 250 982 450 54.9 45.4/33.8 518
+ 200 slab
W10a sway sagging 300 x 300 2365 1608 450 982 55.1 47.5/26.2 520
+200 slab
W10b sway hogging 300 x 300 2365 1608 250 982 450 55.1 47.5/26.2 520
+200 slab
Notes: 1. b = beam breadth, h = beam overall depth, hs = hollow core slab depth (breadth taken as 1.0m in I calculations); 2. Measured from
face of column; 3. As measured values; 4. Two values are for beam-column mortar and beam-slab infill concrete
15a
involving a 300mm deep beam and 200mm deep precast floor
acting compositely were subjected to hogging moments. The
tests would represent the effects of sway loading at external
frame connections. See Fig 11a, b, c and Table 1.
• double sided connections, comprising two 300 mm deep beam
alone in simultaneous hogging and sagging modes. Two tests
involved 300mm deep beams and the same type of floor acting
compositely. These tests would represent the effects of sway
loading at internal frame connections. See Fig 11d, e and Table
2.
• double sided connections, involving two 300mm deep beams
and the same type of floor acting compositely in hogging mode.
These tests would represent the effects of imposed gravity
loading at internal frame connections. See Fig 1e and Table 2.
M R - M RC F c
S RC = <
M RC
2E I/L ...(6)
and rotation requirements are satisfied relative to those at the end Fig 18. Solving equations 3 to 7 yields the following empirical equa-
of a beam. The beam-line is drawn for the design moment of M-φ data for the tions:
resistance MR of the beam (or composite beam in the test W9) and double sided sway R V
S 0.29M RC W
for the rotation of the same pin-ended beam given by φR = loads tests ME= MR S - 0.09 ...(8a)
MRL/2EcI, where Ec is taken as 32kN/mm2, and I is the second S _ M R - M RC i WW
T X
moment of area of the flexurally cracked beam. (The beam span for the tests without floor slabs, and:
of L = 6.0m is chosen as typical.) The intersection of the M-φ plot R V
M E = M R SS 0.064 E c I/L d n+
0.64 - 0.09 W ...(8b)
M RC
with the beam-line gives us the ‘beam-End’ requirement at point WW
S M R - M RC E c I/L
E where the moment ME and secant stiffness SE are measured and T X
presented in Tables 3 and 4. ME and SE are important parameters for the tests with floor slabs.
as they constitute input data for semi-rigid frame analysis and Equation 8 is dimensional: M in kNm, EcI in kNm2, and L in
column stability calculations presented in Part 2 of this paper. m.
The relationship between ME and SE,and the resistance MR and Table 5 shows a comparison of ME determined from equation
flexural stiffness EI/L of the beam is, according to Fig 10, given as: 8 and as obtained from the tests.
M R < S E + 2EI/L F
ME = SE ...(2) Calculation model for beam-end moment and stiffness
Equations 3 to 7 may be used to calculate the required beam-end
In the tests a wide range of results for ME and SE was to be moment ME and secant stiffness SE for any of the connectors and
expected given the large geometrical range over which the tests beams studied in this investigation. Partial safety factors must be
were carried out. The flexural stiffness of the beams themselves applied to material strengths (γm = 1.5 concrete, 1.05 rebars to BS
varied from 18 to 138kNm/m.rad. However, the relationship may 8110,) and to the resulting moment (γf = 1.6 for imposed gravity
be approximated as (Fig 22): loads, or γf = 1.2 for wind and imposed loads).
Two cases were studied,W1 and W9 as shown in Fig 21, chosen
M E = 50 S E - 15 ...(3) because of their similar connection type (welded plate) and beam
size (300 × 300mm), but with test W9 including two T25 tie bars
(Equation 3 is dimensional with ME in kNm and SE in in the floor slab. The design beam-end moment MEd is calculated
kNm/m.rad. It can only be used for the experimental results, not in Appendix B. Note that the flexural stiffness is based on the flex-
for the design values presented later in the paper.) urally cracked second moment of area.
The introduction of √SEis non scientific, except for the fact that Although the model given in Appendix B enables the design
S = M/φ = λz2,where λ is the axial stiffness of the connection,repre- Fig 19. moment and stiffness to be calculated and compared with specific
sented as a linear spring, and z is the internal lever arm of the M-φ data for the single test data, it is necessary to progress this work by developing
section. As the moment M is related to z, then M will be propor- and double sided analytical techniques to cater for other/generic precast connectors.
tional to some function of √S. Further, when the moment ME and hogging moment tests The development of the analytical theory given in Part 2 of this
stiffness SE are normalised with respect to the moment capacity with floor slabs paper is based on the compatibility of deformations observed in
and flexural stiffness of the beam there is remarkable correlation,
as shown in Fig 23, as follows:
K s, E = SE ...(5)
4E c I/L
Figs 22 and 23 both suggest that some initial stiffness is present
even at very low magnitudes of bending moment, a fact rein-
forced by the very high initial stiffness shown in some of the M-φ
plots. For example, in test B6 (600mm deep beam) the initial stiff-
ness is 85kNm/m.rad, but the eventual stiffness ratio Ks,E is only
0.04.
Although equations 2 to 5 appear to tie up the relationship
between ME and SE, they are as yet indeterminate until correla-
tion is found with the calculated moments of resistance MR or MRC.
Analysis of the results has shown that these equations do not yield
Table 5: Comparison of test results obtained from empirical equations ability of these connections in a semi-rigid frame analysis. The
Test arrangement Billet Welded plate Single / double cleats
connections were assembled using precast concrete beams and
Eq.8 Test Ratio Eq.8 Test Ratio Eq.8 Test Ratio columns, and in some cases hollow cored floors and continuity tie
steel, all of which are typical industrial components. Single sided
Single sided no slab 22.8 20.1 1.13 64.0 91.6 0.70 34.6 31.8 1.09
and double sided connections were subjected to gravity hogging
17.1 21.7 0.79 29.3 28.6 1.03 34.1 29.2 1.17
moments and opposing sway moments.The moment ME and stiff-
25.0 29.3 0.85 64.3 73.1 0.88
ness SE requirements of the connector at the end of the beam are
24.9 33.5 0.74 85.0 75.0 1.13
determined using the intercept of the M-φ plot with the beam-line,
45.1 45.8 0.98 66.2 74.3 0.89
33.6 31.7 1.06 135.7 125.1 1.08
drawn for the moment of resistance of the beam MR.
Single sided with slab 79.5 54.2 1.47 103.0 127.9 0.81 no tests
The main conclusions are:
Double sided sway no slab 17.2 17.8 0.97 28.6 40.0 0.71 25.3 11.0 2.30
• All connections tested are semi-rigid and non-linear.
22.8 26.0 0.88 63.8 48.8 1.31 22.0 13.2 1.67
• The tests ultimate moment MU varies from 11 to 238kNm, and
Double sided with slab 182.3 188.2 0.97 259.0 232.0 1.12 no tests the rotational stiffness S varies from 200 to 27 000kNm/radian
180.3 188.2 0.96 259.0 237.0 1.09 depending on beam size, type of connector and presence of tie
84.8 120.5 0.70 bars.
226.5 170.5 1.33 • The calculated moment of resistance of the connector MRC
predicts failure, on average for the 28 tests, to within 1% of the
test value MU, although individual values are much less accu-
rate.
• Knowing only MR and MRC, for which a calculation model is
given, the moment ME and stiffness SE requirements of the
connection at the end of the beam and may be determined
using empirical calculations. ME and SE are then the input
data for semi-rigid frame analyses.
• A calculation model is given for evaluating design values for
MEd and SEd for the welded plate connector with and without
floor slabs.
Appendix A
Calculation models for flexural strength MRC
The moment of resistance of the connector MRC (at the end of the
beam) is based on the equilibrium of all forces present in the
connector, i.e. the beam reinforcement is excluded, but the tie
steel above the beam is included.The following calculation model
the tests. Because of the way in which moment–rotation curves Fig 20. uses experimental observations to determine the various contri-
for precast connections resemble moment–curvature for mono- Relationship between butions to MRC together with the BS 8110 rectangular stress block
lithic r.c. joints, partial safety factors and theoretical relationships ultimate test moment using the as-tested material data.
adopted here are the same as for monolithic r.c. MU and calculated
The experimental results given in this paper show that propri- moment MRC in the (a) Billet connector in beam alone
etary precast beam-column connections can be used for the semi- connectors for all tests In the billet tests subjected to hogging moment, the ultimate
rigid analysis of precast frames. Part 2 of this paper will show mode of failure was by bending and slipping of the top locating
whether the existing code of practise (BS 8110) will accommodate Fig 21. cleat,leading to large cracks of up to 5mm wide.Although the hori-
this approach. Comparison of M-φ zontal capacity of the locating cleat was not measured in the test,
behaviour using its calculated capacity is based on the bending strength of a grade
Conclusions identical connectors 43 rolled angle, py = 275N/mm2, 100 × 100 × 12mm thick × 80mm
28 full scale bending tests have been carried out on precast for the double sided wide,subjected to a horizontal force acting at a lever arm of 45mm.
concrete beam-to-column connections using a wide range of test with floor slabs This gives Fs1 = 30.0kN. It is assumed that the full shear strength
proprietary mechanical connectors. The tests have generated and the single sided of the 16mm diameter dowel, taken (BS 5950, Part 1,Table 32) as
moment vs rotation (M-φ) data that are used to assess the suit- test without floor slabs pq = 0.69 × py = 520N/mm2, is mobilised given the displacement
observed at the seating level.The shear capacity is Fs2 = 201 × 520
= 104.5kN. The flexural strength of the infill concrete is taken as
0.67fcui even though the infill is not confined by links.
The depth to the neutral axis xc is given as:
Fs1 + Fs2
xc = ...(A1)
0.67f cui 0.9b
and
MRC = (Fs1 + Fs2) (dc – 0.45 xc) ...(A2)
Values for MRC are given in Tables A1 and A2, The table over-
leaf is a summary.
(c) Billet and welded plate connectors in beam with floor slabs
Strains measured in the tie bars in the double sided tests attained
yield strains at more than 3000µε at ultimate failure.Thus, in the
bars Fs1 = fy As. It is assumed that the weld and/or dowel are fully
Fig 22. (b) Welded plate connector in beam alone mobilised as described above, i.e. Fs2, although this is unlikely to
Relationship between For the welded plate tests subjected to a hogging moment, the be the case as the neutral axis is close to the seating level.
beam-end moment ME weld appears to be fully mobilised at a tensile strength Fw = However, MRC is calculated according to equations A1 and A2.
and beam-end 412.8kN.As the centroid of the weld is at 200mm from the bottom In the single sided tests the tie bars are cranked at 45° to the
stiffness SE for all tests
Table A1: Calculation data for moment of resistance of connections in single sided tests.
NB: Design uses BS 8110 rectangular stress block method without partial safety factors.
Test Cross section Effective Effective Effective Shear Tensile Tensile Tensile Depth to Connector
ref at depth to level depth to depth to strength of strength strength strength NA of moment
1
connection of connector locating site bars threaded of weld3 of locating of site bars6 concrete capacity
bxh seating cleat dowel2 cleat4 MRC
(mm) (mm) (mm2) (mm) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (mm) (kNm)
B1 300 x 300 140 300 104.5 30.0 17.5 –22.6
B2 300 x 300 160 104.5 15.0 +16.0
B3 300 x 500 190 390 90.5 30.0 22.0 –27.7
B4 300 x 500 310 90.5 11.2 +27.6
B5 300 x 600 290 490 104.5 30.0 13.5 –44.2
B6 300 x 600 310 104.5 8.5 +32.0
B7 300 x 300 140 300 450 104.5 30.0 198.0 44.0 –106.1
W1 300 x 300 200 412.8 49.4 –73.4
W2 300 x 300 100 412.8 45.8 +32.8
W3 300 x 450 200 412.8 45.8 –74.0
W4 300 x 450 250 412.8 41.3 +95.5
W5 300 x 600 200 412.8 48.2 –73.6
W6 300 x 600 400 412.8 47.3 +156.3
W7 300 x 300 200 450 412.8 203.5 75.7 –153.1
DC1 250 x 450 140 340 104.5 68.85 22.9 –36.2
DC2 250 x 450 310 104.5 12.5 +31.8
Notes: 1. Includes depth of floor slab; 2. Shear stress = as measured tensile yield strength × 0.69. ps = 520N/mm2, or 450N/mm2 nominal in
tests B3 and B4. Area of dowel = 201mm2; 3. Neglects any local bending in weld. py = 258N/mm2, length = 80mm nom., throat thickness =
20mm nom; 4. Least value of tensile capacity of 16mm dia. grade 4:6 set screw = 30.6kN, or bending capacity of 100 × 100 × 12 rolled angle ×
80 long = 30kN; 5. Tensile capacity of grade 4:6 M24 threaded rod. Stiffened cleat capacity assumed to be greater than this; 6. Effective stress
in the 45° cranked bars taken from strain gauge data as 0.4fy. fcui and fy given in Table 1
Table A2: Calculation data for moment of resistance of connections in double sided tests.
N:B Design uses BS 8110 rectangular stress block method without partial safety factors
Test Cross section Effective Effective Effective Strength of Tensile Tensile Tensile Depth to Connector
ref at depth to level depth to depth to bolts2 or strength strength strength NA of moment
connection1 of connector locating site bars threaded of weld4 of locating of site bars concrete capacity
bxh seating cleat dowel3 cleat5 MRC
(mm) (mm) (mm2) (mm) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (mm) (kNm)
B8a 300 x 300 160 104.5 13.7 +16.1
B8b 300 x 300 140 300 104.5 30.0 17.6 –22.6
W8a 300 x 300 100 412.8 50.6 +31.9
W8b 300 x 300 200 412.8 50.6 –73.2
SC1a 300 x 300 160 113.0 14.1 +17.4
SC1b 300 x 300 140 113.0 14.1 –15.1
B9a 300 x 500 140 300 450 104.5 30.0 508.6 76.6 –230.4
B9b 300 x 500 140 300 450 104.5 30.0 508.6 76.6 –230.4
W9a 300 x 500 200 450 412.8 508.6 112.2 –264.9
W9b 300 x 550 200 450 412.8 508.6 112.2 –264.9
W10a 300 x 500 300 412.8 48.0 +114.9
W10b 300 x 500 200 450 412.8 510.6 107.5 –267.7
Notes: 1. Includes depth of floor slab; 2. Shear capacity of M24 grade 4:6 bolts = 56.5kN per bolt; 3. Shear stress = as measured tensile yield
strength × 0.69. ps = 520 N/mm2. Area of dowel = 201mm2; 4.Neglects any local bending in weld. py = 258N/mm2, length = 80 mm nom., throat
thickness = 20mm nom; 5. Least value of tensile capacity of 16mm dia. grade 4:6 set screw = 30.6kN, or bending capacity of 100 × 100 × 12
rolled angle × 80 long = 30 kN. fcui and fy given in Table 1
x= 978x10 3 = 161mm
0.45x50x0.9x300
Table B1: Calculation of design beam-end values for MEd and SEd for standard sizes of beams and standard welded Fig B: (above)
plate connectors Welded plate beam-
h Effective Effective xd MRd Effective xcd MRCd I cracked L SRCd SEd MEd to-column
depth to depth to depth to for composite connection
tie bars beam bars weld beam
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kNm) (mm) (mm) (kNm) (mm4) (mm) (kNm/m.rad) (kNm/m.rad)(kNm)
300 450 250 161 259.5 200 159 206.5 1.003E+09 6000 41.7 24.4 198.2
400 550 350 161 357.3 200 159 249.4 1.699E+09 6000 41.9 24.5 203.0
500 650 450 161 455.1 200 159 292.3 2.616E+09 6000 50.1 31.5 232.4
600 750 550 161 552.9 200 159 335.2 3.757E+09 6000 61.7 42.8 273.3
300 450 250 161 259.5 200 159 206.5 1.003E+09 8000 31.3 16.8 189.2
400 550 350 161 357.3 200 159 249.4 1.699E+09 8000 31.4 16.9 193.4
500 650 450 161 455.1 200 159 292.3 2.616E+09 8000 37.6 21.2 218.3
600 750 550 161 552.9 200 159 335.2 3.757E+09 8000 46.3 28.1 252.8
300 450 250 161 259.5 200 159 206.5 1.003E+09 10000 25.0 13.0 185.3
400 550 350 161 357.3 200 159 249.4 1.699E+09 10000 25.2 13.0 189.2
500 650 450 161 455.1 200 159 292.3 2.616E+09 10000 30.1 16.0 211.1
600 750 550 161 552.9 200 159 335.2 3.757E+09 10000 37.0 20.8 241.3
Variable parameters are: depth of beam = 300, 400, 500, 600mm; Beam span = 6.0, 8.0, 10.0m; Constant values are:
b = 300mm; hollow core floor slab depth = 200mm;
As in beam 4 T20 bars = 1256mm2 top & bottom; As in topping 2 T25 bars = 982 mm2; centroidal cover = 50mm
fcu = 50N/mm2; fcui = 40N/mm2; Ec = 32 kN/mm2; fy = 460N/mm2;
Weld size 80 × 20 root, weld py = 215N/mm2; weld tensile capacity = 344kN
Table B2: Calculation of design beam-end values for MEd and SEd for standard sizes of beams and standard billet connectors.
h Effective Effective Effective xc MRCd I cracked L SRCd SEd MEd
depth to depth to depth to for composite
tie bars dowel top cleat beam
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kNm) (mm4) (mm) (kNm/m.rad) (kNm/m.rad) (kNm)
300 450 140 300 110 186.2 1.003E+09 6000 27.2 14.2 150.3
400 550 140 290 110 228.8 1.699E+09 6000 32.3 17.5 171.4
500 650 290 390 110 278.5 2.616E+09 6000 44.0 26.2 214.8
600 750 290 490 110 331.9 3.757E+09 6000 60.2 41.2 275.1
300 450 140 300 110 186.2 1.003E+09 8000 20.4 10.4 148.3
400 550 140 290 110 228.8 1.699E+09 8000 24.2 12.5 166.6
500 650 290 390 110 278.5 2.616E+09 8000 33.0 18.0 203.6
600 750 290 490 110 331.9 3.757E+09 8000 45.1 27.2 255.0
300 450 140 300 110 186.2 1.003E+09 10000 16.3 8.4 149.1
400 550 140 290 110 228.8 1.699E+09 10000 19.4 9.9 165.7
500 650 290 390 110 278.5 2.616E+09 10000 26.4 13.8 198.4
600 750 290 490 110 331.9 3.757E+09 10000 36.1 20.2 243.7
Variable parameters are: depth of beam = 300, 400, 500, 600mm; Beam span = 6.0, 8.0, 10.0m; Constant values are:
b = 300mm; hollow core floor slab depth = 200mm;
As in beam 4 T20 bars = 1256mm2 top & bottom; As in topping 2 T25 bars = 982mm2;
fcu = 50N/mm2; fcui = 40N/mm2; fy = 460 N/mm2;
Grade 8:8 dowel; area = 201mm2; shear strength py = 375N/mm2; shear capacity = 75.4kN
Top locating cleat tensile capacity = 30.0kN
Step 3. Second moment of area for the composite beam, I K s, Ed = 24.5x6000 x10 9 = 0.68
cracked 4x32000x1.7x10 9
Modular ratio = 200/32 = 6.25. Net value (less concrete area Step 7. Beam-end moment of resistance MEd
replaced) = 6.25 – 1 = 5.25. (i) from experimental results
Height above bottom of beam to neutral axis in cracked section: Eq. [4] MEd = (0.8 ×√0.68−0.09) × 357.3 = 203.5kNm
REFERENCES
1. BS 8110: 1985, The Structural Use of Concrete, British Standards Institute, London of Civil Engineering Structural Connections, COST C1 International Conference,
2. Mahdi, A. A., ‘Moment rotation effects on the stability of columns in precast Liege, September 1998, p 65-74
concrete structures’, PhD Thesis, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 12. ENV 1994-1-1, Eurocode 3, Part 1.1 – General Rules for Buildings: Annex J on Steel
1992 Joints in Building Frames, British Standards Institute, London, 1994
3. Elliott, K. S., ‘Multi-storey Precast Concrete Framed Structures, Blackwell Science, 13. Ferreira, M.A. and Elliott, K. S., ‘Strength-stiffness requirement approach for
Oxford, United Kingdom, 1996, 624 pp semi-rigid precast connections’, University of Nottingham Report 2002
4. Gorgun, H., ‘Semi-rigid behaviour of connections in precast concrete struc- 14. Ife, J. S., Uzumeri, S. M. and Higgins, M. W., ‘Behaviour of the ‘Cazalay Hanger’
tures’, PhD Thesis, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 1997 subjected to vertical loading, PCI Journal, 13/6, Dec. 1968, p 48-66
5. Ragupathy, R., ‘Semi-rigid connections in precast concrete frames’, PhD Thesis, 15. Precast / Prestressed Concrete Institute, Design and Typical Details of Connections
City University, London, 1993 for Precast and Prestressed Concrete, 2nd. Ed., Chicago, IL, USA, 1988
6. Guo, M., ‘Finite element analysis of confined concrete in building frame compo- 16. Stanton, J. F., Anderson, R. G., Dolan, C. and McCleary, D. E., ‘Moment resist-
nents and joints’, PhD Thesis, University of Southampton, UK, 1998 ant connections and simple connections’, PCI Special Research Project, No. 1/4,
7. Elliott, K. S., Davies, G., Gorgun, H. and Adlparvar R., ‘Stability of semi-rigid 1986
precast concrete structures’, PCI Journal, 43/2, March-April 1998, p 42-60 17. Keronen, A., ‘Effect of semi-rigid connections in reinforced precast concrete
8. Elliott, K. S., ‘Semi-rigid connections in precast concrete structures and bridges’, portal frame – load tests’, Report 69, Technical University of Tampere, Finland,
Control of the Semi-rigid Behaviour of Civil Engineering Structural Connections, COST 1996
C1 International Conference, Liege, September 1998, p 1-10 19. Comair, F. and Dardare, J., ‘Model testing of precast semi-rigid beam-to-column
9. Elliott, K. S., Davies, G., Mahdi, A. A., Gorgun, H., Virdi. K. and Ragupathy, P., connection’, COST C1 Proc. 1st Workshop, Semi-rigid Behaviour of Civil Engineering
‘Precast concrete semi-rigid beam-to column connections in skeletal frames’, Structural Connections, E.N.S.A.I.S., Strasbourg, France, 1992, p99-119
Control of the Semi-rigid Behaviour of Civil Engineering Structural Connections, COST 20. DeChefdebien, A. and Dardare, J., ‘Experimental investigations on current
C1 International Conference, Liege, September 1998, p41-50 connections between precast concrete components’, COST C1 Proc. 2nd
10. Guo, M. and Jolly, C. K., ‘Finite element models for the analysis of steel and Workshop, Semi-rigid Behaviour of Civil Engineering Structural Connections, CTU
concrete in construction’, Advances in Computational techniques for Structural Prague, Czech Republic, 1994, p 21-30
Engineering, Ed. B. Topping, Civil-Comp Press, 1996, p 283-294 21. Ferreira, M.A., ‘Deformability of beam-column connections in precast concrete
11. Jolly, C. K., Guo, M., Virdi, K. and Ragupathy, P., ‘Application of numerical analy- structures’, PhD Thesis, School of Engineering of Sao Carlos, University of Sao
sis to connections in precast concrete frames’, Control of the Semi-rigid Behaviour Paulo, Brazil, February 1999 [In Portugese]