Beam Col.

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 15

By:

Marwa Mohamed Ibrahim


Supervisor:

Prof. Dr. Hamdy Aboulfath


Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column
Connection with Interface Elements under Cyclic Loading

INTRODUCTION
The reinforced concrete beam-column joint is defined as the portion of the column
within the depth of the beam framing into the column.
An important result from the research done so far is that the notion of a rigid joint can
be discarded forever. Thus, just as beams, columns and other structural elements
exhibit flexibility in response to applied loading, so do the joints"

(Sarsam and Phipps 1985) reported on tests carried out by the author that there are
five high strength exterior beam-column joints. The loading was applied in two stages.
In the first stage, the column was loaded to a predetermined concentric load and this
was kept constant throughout the test. In the second stage, the beam was loaded near
its tip as a cantilever until either the joint failed or the beam failed. The specimens
were grouped to examine different parameters.
(Hamil et al, 2000) used two-dimension nonlinear finite element method for the
analysis of high strength reinforced concrete beam-column connection. Quadrilateral
elements formed from a pair of triangular elements with nodes at each corner were
used to represent concrete while the reinforcement was represented by bar element.
Perfect bond between concrete and steel was assumed to occur. The developed
model was shown to be sensitive to changes in concrete strength, the detailing
arrangements of the tension steel and the presence or absence of joint ties. From their
investigation, the strength of a joint without column ties was proportional to the square
root of the concrete`s compressive strength.
(Hamza 2005) studied the behavior of beam-column joints with nonlinear interface
elements. She assumed the interface as a thin brick element with Millard dowel forces.
Classification of Beam-Column Joint
Structural joints are classified into two categories in accordance with the loading
conditions on the joint.
1. A joint for which the primary design criterion is strength and no significant inelastic
deformations are expected".

1 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


2. Joint connecting members for which the primary design criterion is the sustained
strength under reversals in the inelastic range. The requirements for joints are
dependent on the deformations at the joint imposed by the loading condition.
Outline of the Computer Program
The computer program P3DNFEA (three-dimensional nonlinear finite element
analysis) has been used in the present work. This program is originally developed by
Al-Shaarbaf. The main objective of the program is to analyze reinforced concrete
members under general three-dimensional states of loading up to failure.
In the present research work, the computer program has been modified to analyze
beam-column joints under cyclic loading. A nonlinear cyclic behavior model for
concrete is used for uniaxial and multiaxial states of stress. Also, a nonlinear cyclic
model for reinforcing bars is presented. Closing and reopening of cracks during cyclic
loading has been taken into consideration.
Termination of the Analysis
The finite element analysis is terminated when any of the following criteria is satisfied.
1. The stiffness matrix is no longer positive definite.
2. A reinforcing bar has been fractured.
3. Excessive concrete crushing takes place.
4. The number of increments exceeds a maximum specified number.
5. The number of iterations exceeds a maximum specified number.

Figure 1. Flow chart of the developed program DPACJ

2 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


Crack Model for Concrete in Tension

A smeared fixed-cracking Is used to represent the crack model and it is widely used
in connection with the finite element analysis. This implies that the cracks are
distributed at a cracked sampling point (Al-Shaarbaf). It is assumed that the concrete
becomes orthotropic after the first crack has occurred. Cracks are assumed to form in
a plane perpendicular to the direction of the maximum principal tensile".

Modeling of Reinforcement
In this study the reinforcing steel is modeled as a linear elastic, homogeneous material
that can be assumed to have the same strength in tension and compression behavior
and its mechanical properties in comparison to the properties of concrete are well
known and well understood. Reinforcing bars are usually long and slender and
therefore can be generally assumed to be capable of transmitting axial forces only".
In the current study, an elastic-linear work hardening model simulates the uniaxial
stress-strain behavior of steel bars (Raid Ahmed 2005).

Figure 2. Idealized elastic-plastic stress-strain relationship for reinforcing steel

Closing and Re-Opening of Cracks


For a member under cyclic or repeated loading, cracks at sampling points may close.
For a closing crack it is assumed that the orthotropic of the sampling point under
consideration is maintained.
Unloading and re-opening of cracks are assumed to follow a secant path. The secant
path modulus, E1, can be evaluated from the previously stored maximum strain
developed normal to the cracked plane.

3 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


This secant modulus may be used to calculate the retained stress as:

Where ἐn is the maximum strain developed normal to the cracked plane.


Shear Retention Models
In the finite element analysis of reinforced concrete members, a shear retention model
is usually used to take into account the capacity of the cracked concrete to transfer
shear across the crack. In the present study, a reduction factor has been used across
the crack plane, to reduce the shear stiffness at the cracked sampling points. Before
cracking a value of unity is assigned to the shear reduction factor. As the crack
propagates, the shear reduction factor is taken to be linearly decreasing with the strain
normal to the cracked plane, which represents the crack width. When the cracks have
sufficiently opened, a constant value is assigned to account for dowel action. The
shear retention model can be expressed as:
1) For ἐn ˂ ἐcr
β = 1.0 (1)
2) For ἐcr˂ ἐn˂ɣ1 ἐcr

3) For ἐn˃ ɣ1 ἐcr

Figure 3. Shear retention for concrete.

4 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


Outline of The Computer Program
The computer program P3DNFEA (three-dimensional nonlinear finite element
analysis) has been used in the present work. This program is originally developed by
Al-Shaarbaf. The main objective of the program is to analyze reinforced concrete
members under general three-dimensional states of loading up to failure." In the
present research work, the computer program has been modified to analyze beam-
column joints under cyclic loading. A nonlinear cyclic behaviour model for concrete is
used for uniaxial and multiaxial states of stress. Also, a nonlinear cyclic model for
reinforcing bars is presented. Closing and reopening of cracks during cyclic loading
has been taken into consideration."

Interface Element
The behaviour of a composite concrete specimen depends upon the interaction
between the two concerts
cast at different times. There can be separation, closing of gap, and slipping between
the two parts. In
the present study a thin layer element is used to represent this behaviour.
Thin Layer Element
An isoperimetric finite element formulation, which is treated essentially like a solid
element, can be used to represent the behaviour of the interface region (Desai and
Zaman 1984), since the element is treated essentially like any other solid element, its
incremental stress-strain relationship is expressed as:

Shear-Friction Concept
The shear- friction contrives Provides a convenient tool for the design of members for
direct shear where it is inappropriate to design for diagonal tension, as in precast
connections, and brackets or(corbels). The approach is to assume that a crack has
formed at an expected location, as illustrated in Fig. ( 4 ) . As slip begins to occur along
the crack, the roughness of the crack surface forces the opposite faces of the crack to
separate. The separation is resisted by reinforcement (Avf) across the assumed crack.
The tensile force (Avf fy) developed in the reinforcement by this strain induces an
equal and opposite normal clamping force, which in turn generates a frictional force
(Avf fyμ) parallel to the crack to resist further slip, where μ is the coefficient of friction.

5 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


Figure 4. Idealization of the shear-friction concept

Application of Finite Element Analysis to Beam-Column Joints


A three-dimensional nonlinear finite element analysis has been carried out on corner
beam-column joints by implementing the modified computer program. The three-
dimensional model describes the behaviour of the analyzed corner beam-column
joint under cyclic loading. The example has been chosen from the available
experimental studies for the numerical analysis.
The example was tested by (Sarsam1983).
Beam-Column Joint Specimen (under monotic loads)
Nine specimens of beam-column joints (5 exterior and 4 interior) were tested by
(Sarsam 1983). The plane exterior ones-Ex series were made of two pours. The first
pour was made on one day. This pour included the specimen up to the level of the top
of the joint. The second pour was made on the next day for the top column. Thus, a
horizontal construction joint existed at top of joints.

Description of Beam-Column Joint Specimen


The column was reinforced with four 16 mm longitudinal bars and 8mm closed links at
85mm center to center spacing, giving three joint links. The beam was reinforced with
two 16mm bars on the tension side and two 12mm bars on the compression side.
Beam links were 8mm of closed type and spaced at 130mm center to center."

Ex1 specimen is used in the present study, its dimensions are shown in Table (1) and
Fig. (5). Material properties and additional material parameters of this specimen are
shown in Table (2). The column was first loaded to a predetermined value of (Nc),

6 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


prior to any beam loading, the next stage involved loading the beam up to ultimate
load.

Figure 5. Experimental beam-column joint specimens of (Sarsam 1983)

7 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


Finite Element Idealization
The concrete of specimen Ex1 is idealized by using 5820-noded brick elements
(including 1 interface element at the top level of the joint), (for half of this specimen).
To simulate the procedure of loading that occurred during the experimental test, the
column axial load has been firstly applied in equal increments of 10% of the maximum
column load for this specimen. Later, for Ex1 two different sizes of increments have
been used for beam loading. The beam was loaded initially by increments of 37.5 kN
up to 75% of the expected collapse load (40 kN). Then reduced increments of 1.43 kN
each were applied until failure load has been reached. Both the initial and post-
cracking stiffness are reasonably predicted, table (2). For this ordinary reinforced
concrete beam, the tension-stiffening parameters ἀ1and ἀ2 was set equal to 55 and
0.5 respectively. While the shear-retention parameters ɣ1, ɣ2 and ɣ3 was set equal to
10, 0.5 and 0.1 respectively.

Analysis of Ex1 Specimen (under static load)


In order to analyze the specimen, the effect of the thickness (t) equal to 0.014mm, and
1.4mm have been carried out. The results show that the type of failure of the specimen
Ex1 is beam hinging for the range (0.014-0.14) mm for thickness of interface element,
fig. (6). A response stiffer than the experimental results was obtained when the
thickness is reduced within the range, and the best fit to the experimental results was
obtained at t=0.14mm with effective thickness of Gaussian point of 0.038mm, in which
the effect of nonlinearities along the loading stages is clear. The failure load of
numerical results is 37kN while the failure load of experimental results is 36.04 kN, so
that the error ratio is 3.9%. In the present study the value of thickness of the interface
element equal to 0.14mm is fixed for Ex1 specimen, Fig. (7).

Figure 6. Experimental and analytical response to vary interface thickness for Ex1

8 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


Figure 7. Experimental and analytical response for t=0.14mm for Ex1

Beam-Column Joint Specimen (under cyclic loads)


Also Ex1 has been taken. This was made of two pours. The first pour was made on
one day. This pour included the specimen up to the level of the top of the joint. The
second pour was made on the next day for the top column. Thus, a horizontal
construction joint existed at top of joints.

Figure 8. Finite element mesh of half of Ex1

9 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


Finite Element Idealization
By making use of the geometric and loading symmetry, a segment, which represents
one-half of the beam-column joint, has been used for the finite element analysis. This
segment has been discredited into 5820-noded brick elements (including 1 interface
element at the top level of the joint). The column axial load has been firstly applied in
equal increments of 10% of the maximum column load for this specimen. Later, four
different sizes of increments have been used for beam loading. As in Table (2), For
this ordinary reinforced concrete beam the tension-stiffening parameters ἀ1and ἀ2 was
set equal to 55 and 0.5 respectively. While the shear-retention parameters ɣ1, ɣ2 and
ɣ3 was set equal to 10, 0.5 and 0.1 respectively.

Analysis of Ex1 Specimen (under cyclic load)

Fig. (9) shows the numerical repeated load-beam tip deflection curve. Also the figure
reveals that the first half-cyclic, a tri-segmental curve was usually recognized. The first
segment represents the elastic uncracked stage of behaviour. The second represents
the elastic-cracked stage. While, the third stage represents the yielding of main
reinforcement. During the sequence of half cycles, these segments will disappear and
a smooth behaviour is seen which is characterized by cracking and post-yielding
stages.

Figure 9. Numerical tip deflection mm

10 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


Parametric study

15.1 The Effect of Column Axial Load

In order to inspect the effect of column axial load on the behaviour of construction joint,
a numerical study has been carried out, one with experimental column axial load
(Nc=292.6 kN), and the other with half column axial load (Nc/2) for the case of
construction joint at the top level of the beam - column joint. It can be observed from
Fig. (11) and (12) that the shear and normal this feature may be the following: higher
compressive stresses (at Nc=292.6 kN), in spite of the more intimate interlocking they
secure, produced a shortening of the protruding asperities and subsequently reduce
overriding resistance. This mechanism is less apparent at Nc/2. On the contrary, due
to loss of some confinement for Nc/2, the response of the specimen at Nc/2 is softer
than the response for Nc=292.6kN, Fig. (10).

Figure 10. Load-beam tip deflection curve

11 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


Figure 11. Normal strains distribution in joint

Figure 12.Shear strains distribution in joint.

The Effect of the Percentage Steel across the Construction Joint

Three numerical tests have been carried out by using percentages of steel across the
construction joint (diameter of the bar)(16mm), (18mm), and (20mm) for the
construction joint at the top level of the beam-column joint, these tests occurred with
the original designed specimen. From Fig. (13), the deflection decreases with the
increase in the steel percentage across the construction joint (column reinforcement),
the contribution in this result is the decreased strains in joint due to increase in dowel
stiffness. Figs. (14) and (15 ) show the shear and normal strains in joint. It can be

12 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


notice that these strains decrease with the increase in the steel percentage across the
construction joint.

Figure 13. Effect of diameter of crossing steel on load-beam tip deflection

Figure 14. Shear strains distribution in joint

Figure 15. Normal strains distribution in joint

13 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION


References
[1] Al-Shaarabaf I A S 1990 Ph. D. Thesis, University of Bradford, Three-Dimensional Nonlinear
Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Beams in Torsion", England.
[2] Sarsam K F and Phipps M E 1985 Magazine of Concrete Research, The Shear Design of In-Situ
Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints Subjected to Monotonic Loading , 37(130) 16-28.
[3] Hamil S J and Scortt R H 2000 Developments in High Strength Concrete Beam- Column
Connection Design, Internet.
[4] Hamz D M 2005 M.Sc Thesis, Baghdad University, Analysis of Corner Beam-Column Junction
With Inclusion of The Effect of Construction Joints, Iraq, 115PP.
[5] Sarsam K F 1983 Ph. D. Thesis, University of Manchester U.K. Strength and Deformation of

14 BEAM COLUMN CONNECTION

You might also like