An experimental assessment on the seismic behaviour of precast hollowcore slab to beam connection with different connection details

Vinutha, D.; Vidjeapriya, R.; Jaya, K. P.

doi:10.1007/s43452-024-00881-1

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

An experimental assessment on the seismic behaviour of precast hollowcore slab to beam connection with different connection details

Autorzy

Vinutha D. , Vidjeapriya R. , Jaya K. P.

Wybrane pełne teksty z tego czasopisma

http://www.springer.com/journal/43452

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.1007/s43452-024-00881-1

Warianty tytułu

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

This study evaluates the cyclic response of the Precast Hollow Core Slab (PHCS) to the beam connection by proposing a novel connection detail. The evaluation involved, three different connection details, namely, (1) Continuity rebar and U-type Core Rebar Discrete with 100 mm ledge width (CUCRD_100); (2) continuity rebar and Core Rebar Combined with 100 mm ledge width (CCRC_100); and (3) continuity rebar and Core Rebar Combined with Ties along with 100 mm ledge width (CCRCT_100) were experimentally validated. These were validated through experimental testing, comparing their performance with a reference specimen that adhered to New Zealand guidelines using Continuity rebar and Core Rebar Discrete with 100 mm ledge width (CCRD_100). Displacement controlled reverse cyclic loading, following the ACI T1.1–0.1 protocol, was applied to the end of a hollow core slab for the experimental testing. The structural performance of all four connections considered failure pattern, strength, hysteretic behaviour, energy dissipation, displacement ductility, stiffness degradation, and equivalent viscous damping. The overall seismic efficiency of the connections was assessed using ACI 374.1–05 approval criteria. The experimental results proved that the peak load-carrying capacity for CCRCT_100 specimen was observed to be greater in both directions of loading (positive and negative) when compared with the other connection detailing. The presence of transverse reinforcement enhanced the confining capacity of the concrete in the joint region which substantially increased the ductility and dissipation of energy in CCRCT_100 specimen. The seismic performance of every connection specimen was favourable, and they all met the ACI 374.1–05 approval standards.

Słowa kluczowe

precast hollow core slab beam connection cyclic response hysteretic behaviour

prefabrykat płyta kanałowa belka

Wydawca

Springer
Wrocław University of Science and Technology

Czasopismo

Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering

Rocznik

2024

Tom

Vol. 24, no. 3

Strony

art. no. e167, 2024

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 76 poz., fot., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Vinutha D.

vinutha.devaraj@gmail.com

Division of Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering Guindy, Anna University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

autor

Vidjeapriya R.

vidjeapriya@annauniv.edu

Division of Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering Guindy, Anna University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3604-4780

autor

Jaya K. P.

kpjaya@nayan.co.in

Division of Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering Guindy, Anna University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Bibliografia

1. Elliot KS (2017) Precast concrete structures, Second, CRC press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton.
2. Singhal S, Chourasia A, Chellappa S, Parashar J. precast reinforced concrete shear walls: state of the art review. Struct Concr. 2019;20:886–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201800129.
3. Ersoy U. Seismic resistant reinforced concrete structures-design principles. J Islam Acad Sci. 1988;1:20–6.
4. Vinutha D, Vidjeapriya R, Jaya KP. Seismic performance of precast slab to beam connection: an overview. Curr Sci.2021;121(1):61. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v121/i1/61-76.
5. SR Corney (2018) Seismic performance of precast concrete flooring systems, University of Auckland.
6. S Corney, R Henry, J Ingham (2015) Seismic testing of connections in precast concrete floor systems, in: Concr. – Innov. Des. Fib Symp. Copenhagen., Copenhagen, pp. 1–12.
7. Park R. Seismic design and construction of precast concrete buildings in New Zealand. PCI J. 2002;47(5):60–75. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.09012002.60.75.
8. Clough DP. Considerations in the design and construction of precast concrete diaphragms for earthquake loads. PCI J.1982;27(2):79–93. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.03011982.79.93.
9. PT de Souza, MN Kataoka, ALHC El Debs (2017) Experimental and numerical analysis of the push-out test on shear studs in hol-low core slabs Eng Struct 147: 398 409 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.05.068.
10. Fu F, Lam D. Experimental study on semi-rigid composite joint swith steel beams and precast hollowcore slabs. J Constr Steel Res. 2006;62:771–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2005.11.013.
11. Woods LJ (2008) The significance of negative bending momentsin the seismic performance of hollow-core flooring, University of Canterbury.
12. Woods LJ, Bull DK, Fenwick RC (2008) The seismic performance of hollow-core flooring: the significance of negative bending moments, in: 14th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., pp. 1–8. http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/14_05-03-0046.PDF.
13. Fenwick R, Bull D, Gardiner D (2010) Assessment of Hollow-Core Floors for Seismic Performance, Christchurch.
14. New Zealand Concrete Society and New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, Guidelines for the use of structural precast concrete in buildings, Second, Centre for Advanced Engineering, Christchurch, 1999.
15. Mejia-McMaster JC, Park R (1994) Tests on special reinforcement for the end support of hollow-core slabs, PCI J 39: 90–105. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.09011994.90.105.
16. Oliver SJ (1998) The performance of concrete topped precast hol-lowcore flooring systems reinforced with and without dramix steel fibres under simulated seismic loading, University of Canterbury.
17. M. Herlihy (2000) Precast concrete floor support and diaphragmaction, University of Canterbury.
18. Matthews J, Bull D, Mander J, Hollowcore floor slab performance following a severe earthquake. Proc Fib Symp Concr Struct Seism Reg. 2003;2003:296–7.
19. Lindsay DKB, R.A, Mander JB, Preliminary results from experiments on hollow-core floor systems in precast concrete buildings, in: 2004 NZSEE Conf., 2004: pp. 1–9.
20. Lindsay RA, Mander JB, Bull DK, Experiments on the seismic performance of hollow-core floor systems in precast concrete buildings, in: 13th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., Vancouver, 2004:pp. 1–6.
21. MacPherson CJ, Mander JB, Bull DK (2005) Reinforced Concrete Seating Details of Hollowcore Floor Systems, in: New Zeal. Soc. Earthq. Eng. Conf., New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, Rotorua: pp. 1–9.
22. MacPherson C (2005) Seismic performance and forensic analysis of a precast concrete hollow-core floor super-assemblage, University of Canterbury.
23. Bull D, Matthews J. Proof of concept tests for hollowcore floor unit connections, Christchurch, 2003.
24. Liew HY (2004) Performance of hollowcore floor seating connection details, University of Canterbury.
25. NZS 3101:part 1, Concrete structures standard: part 1- the design of concrete structures, First, New Zealand Standard Council, 2006.
26. Corney SR, Henry RS, Ingham JM (2014) Testing support connections of 400 hollow-core precast concrete floors, in: NCEE2014 - 10th U.S. Natl. Conf. Earthq. Eng. Front. Earthq. Eng., pp.1–11. https://doi.org/10.4231/D32N4ZJ50.
27. Corney SR, Henry RS, Ingham JM. Performance of precast concrete floor systems during the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquake series. Mag Concr Res. 2014;66:563–75. https://doi.org/10.1680/macr.13.00106.
28. Corney SR, Ingham JM, Henry RS. Seismic testing of support connections in deep hollow-core floor units. ACI Struct J. 2018.https://doi.org/10.14359/51702062.
29. Yuksel E, Gullu A, Durgun Y, Binbir E, Senol E, Khajehdehi A, Saruhan H. Z-type shear connector for interface of hollow-coreslab and cast-in-place topping concrete. Eng Struct. 2020;214:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110563.
30. Baran E. Effects of cast-in-place concrete topping on flexural response of precast concrete hollow-core slabs. Eng Struct.2015;98:109–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.04.017.
31. Girhammar UA, Pajari M. Tests and analysis on shear strength of composite slabs of hollow core units and concrete topping. Constr Build Mater. 2008;22:1708–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.05.013.
32. M. Pajari, H Koukkari (1998), Shear resistance of PHC slabs sup-ported on beams. I: Tests, J. Struct. Eng. 124 1050–1061. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:9(1050).
33. M. Pajari (1998) Shear resistance of PHC slabs supported on beams. II: analysis, J. Strcutural Eng. 124 1062–1073.
34. Adawi A, Youssef MA, Meshaly ME. Experimental investigation of the composite action between hollow core slabs with machine-cast finish and concrete topping. Eng Struct. 2015;91:1–15.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.02.018.
35. Mones RM, Breña SF. Hollow-core slabs with cast-in-place concrete toppings: a study of interfacial shear strength. PCI J.2013;58(3):124–41. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.06012013.124.141.
36. Ibrahim IS, Elliott KS, Abdullah R, Kueh ABH, Sarbini NN. Experimental study on the shear behaviour of precast concrete hollow core slabs with concrete topping. Eng Struct. 2016;125:80–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.06.005.
37. Ajdukiewicz A, Węglorz M, Kliszczewicz A. Experimental study on effectiveness of interaction between pretensioned hol-low-core slabs and concrete topping. Archit Civ Eng Environ. 2008;1:57–66.
38. Xue H, Ashour A, Ge W, Cao D, Sun C, Cao S. Seismic response of prestressed precast reinforced concrete beam-column joints assembled by steel sleeves. Eng Struct. 2023;276:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115328.
39. Gautham A, Sahoo DR. Performance of SRC column-RC beam joints under combined axial and cyclic lateral loadings. Eng Struct. 2022;260:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.114218.
40. Wang H, Marino EM, Pan P, Liu H, Nie X. Experimental study of a novel precast prestressed reinforced concrete beam-to-column joint. Eng Struct. 2018;156:68–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.11.011.
41. Vidjeapriya R, Jaya KP. Experimental study on two simple mechanical precast beam-column connections under reverse cyclic loading. J Perform Constr Facil. 2013;27:402–14. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cf.1943-5509.0000324.
42. Vidjeapriya R, Jaya KP. Behaviour of precast beam-column mechanical connections under cyclic loading. Asian J Civ Eng.2012;13:233–45.
43. Guerrero H, Alcocer SM, Carrillo J, Escobar JA, Hernandez H. Steel fiber reinforced concrete wall-slab joints subjected to cyclic loading. Eng Struct. 2023;275: 115281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115281.
44. Amiri M, Reza Esfahani M (2023) Effect of using Engineered Cementitious Composites (ECC) on failure behavior of flat slab-column connections, Structures. 47: 2397–2407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2022.12.058.
45. Drakatos IS, Muttoni A, Beyer K. Internal slab-column connections under monotonic and cyclic imposed rotations. Eng Struct.2016;123:501–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.05.038.
46. Xue W, Huang Q, Li Y. Experimental study of precast concrete shear walls with spiral-confined lap connections under cyclic loads. J Build Eng. 2022;52: 104467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104467.
47. Hemamalini S, Vidjeapriya R (2020), Influence of connection detailing on the performance of wall-to-wall vertical connections under cyclic loading, Adv. Concr. Constr. 9: 437–448.https://doi.org/10.12989/acc.2020.9.5.437.
48. IS: 1893-Part-1, Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures: part-1 general provisions and buildings, Sixth revi, BIS, New delhi, 2016.
49. IS 456, Plain and reinforced concrete, Fourth rev, BIS, Newdelhi, 2000.
50. MNL 120–04, PCI design handbook: precast and prestressed concrete, Sixth edit, Prestressed concrete institute, Chicago, 2004.
51. IS 13920, Ductile design and detailing of reinforced concrete structures subjected to seismic forces - code of practice, First revi, BIS, New delhi, 2016.
52. NZS 3101:Part 2, Concrete structures standard-commentary: part2 - commentary on the design of concrete structures, First, NewZealand Standard Council, 2006.
53. Hicks SJ, Lawson RM (2003) Design of composite beams using precast concrete slabs, The steel construction institute, Ascot.
54. IS:15916, Building design and erection using prefabricated concrete-code of practice, BIS, New delhi, 2010.
55. FIB Commission 6 - Prefabrication, Special design considerations for precast prestressed hollow core floors - fib Bulletin No. 06, International federation for structural concrete, Lausanne, 2000.
56. SP 34, Handbook on concrete reinforcement and detailing, Fifth, BIS, New delhi, 1987.
57. D. Camarena (2006), Finite element analysis of precast prestressed beam-column concrete connection in seismic construction, Chalmers University of Technology,. http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/19635.pdf.
58. R. Park (2003) The fib state-of-the-art report on the seismic design of precast concrete building structures, in: Pacific Conf. Earthq. Eng., New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering: pp. 1–13.http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/2003/Print/Paper011p.pdf.
59. Nimse RB, Joshi DD, Patel PV. Behavior of wet precast beam column connections under progressive collapse scenario: an experimental study. Int J Adv Struct Eng. 2014;6:149–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-014-0072-3.
60. Parastesh H, Hajirasouliha I, Ramezani R. A new ductile moment-resisting connection for precast concrete frames in seismic regions: An experimental investigation. Eng Struct. 2014;70:144–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.04.001.
61. IS 516, Method of tests for strength of concrete, BIS, New delhi, 1959.
62. IS:1786, High strength deformed steel bars and wires for concrete reinforcement— specification, Fourth rev, BIS, New delhi, 2008.
63. SESOC, NZSEE, NZCS, Seismic performance of hollow core floor systems - guidelines for design assessment and retrofit, Department of building and housing, 2009.
64. Scott N, Hawkins NM, Kreger ME, Martin LD (2001) Acceptance criteria for moment frames based on structural testing: ACIT1.1–01, ACI innovation task group 1 and collaborators.
65. Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R. Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. J Struct Eng. 1988;114:1804–26.
66. R. Park (1988) State of the art report-ductility evaluation from laboratory and analytical testing, WCEE, Tokyo-kyoto. http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/9_vol8_605.pdf.
67. Park R, Paulay T. Reinforced concrete structures, John wiley and sons. NY. 1975. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420037135.ch4.
68. Park R. Evaluation of ductility of structures and structural assem-blages from laboratory testing. Bull New Zeal Soc Earthq Eng.1989;22:155–66.
69. ASCE/SEI 41–06, Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings, ASCE, 2007.
70. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Effects of strength and stiffness degradation on seismic response, 2009.
71. E. Saqan (1995) Evaluation of ductile beam-column connections for use in seismic- resistant precast frames, The University of Texas at Austin.
72. Zhang J, Ding C, Rong X, Yang H, Wang K, Zhang B. Experimental seismic study of precast hybrid SFC/RC beam–column connections with different connection details. Eng Struct. 2020;208:110295. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. engst ruct. 2020.110295.
73. Zhu Q, Liang S, Zhu X, Dang L, Wang J, Xu C. Investigation of hollow slab-column structure under lateral cyclic loading. J Phys Conf Ser. 2019;1176:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1176/4/042045.
74. Yang S, Lin Y, Guan D, Che Y, Liu W, Guo Z. Experimental investigation of a locally-compressed beam-column connection with bar-typed fuses. J Build Eng. 2023;63:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.105562.
75. ACI 374.1–05, Acceptance criteria for moment frames based on structural testing and commentary, ACI committee 374, 2005.
76. Singhal S, Chourasia A, Kajale Y. Cyclic behaviour of precastrein forced concrete beam-columns connected with headed bars. J Build Eng. 2021;42: 103078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103078.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa nr POPUL/SP/0154/2024/02 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki II" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki (2025)

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-85ace7a1-9a15-4e8a-844b-e539f54db1c2