Abstract

The study presents a numerical investigation on exterior reinforced concrete (RC) beam-column joints under seismic actions based on a macro-modelling approach proposed by the authors in a recent paper. The followed approach makes use of the well-known “scissors model” where two nonlinear rotational springs arranged in series were introduced to schematize the shear behavior of the joint panel and, moreover, the possible occurrence of the debonding of longitudinal steel rebars at the beam-joint interface. In this paper, the scissor model is employed in the context of a novel predictive approach with the twofold objective to: 1) develop a new model for the estimate of the maximum shear strength of RC joints by performing a multivariate linear regression analysis on a set of experimental tests and, 2) define a new multilinear backbone joint shear stress-strain law to be assigned to one of the mentioned springs. In particular, the identification of the shear strain parameters is obtained by performing a sensitivity analysis in which a number of monotonic load-drift numerical curves are derived by varying the strain values in ranges opportunely a-priori defined and compared with the experimental ones to investigate their accuracy. Finally, cyclic analyses on RC joints collected in the experimental database are carried out by considering the backbone joint shear stress-strain law identified in the calibration process. The analyses are performed by using the nonlinear open-source finite element platform, OpenSees, in which the “pinching4” uniaxial material model, available in the software library, is implemented to set the parameters governing the hysteresis rules and pinching effect. To this purpose, five literature proposals suggesting the values to use for such parameters are taken into account and their assessment is presented in the paper. The obtained outcomes have allowed, on the one hand, to identify the proposal providing the best numerical simulations of the experimental results and, on the other end, to draw useful indications on how to further improve the cyclic modelling by opportunely modifying the setting of the “pinching4” material model parameters.

Highlights

  • The latest severe earthquakes occurred in Italy and in many areas around the world have frequently highlighted that failure of beam-column joints represents a very recurring event in reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings built prior to the introduction of the latest seismic codes

  • Past and recent earthquake events have underlined a behavior of existing RC frame structures in some cases characterized by significant damages and failure of beam-column joints

  • A numerical modelling approach to evaluate the behavior of exterior RC beam – column joints has been presented

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The latest severe earthquakes occurred in Italy and in many areas around the world have frequently highlighted that failure of beam-column joints represents a very recurring event in reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings built prior to the introduction of the latest seismic codes. Strain γ1 Regarding the strain corresponding to the cracking shear strength τ1, investigating only three values was considered sufficient for the purpose of the study; the monotonic analyses previously performed by implementing the 30 mentioned model combinations showed that a larger variation of this parameter does not lead to a significant scatter in terms of errors calculated between experimental and numerical enveloped in the first loading branch In detail, these analyses highlighted that, relatively to γ1 parameter, the lowest errors were generally obtained by considering model B2 in which the value γ1 0.0013 (upper end of the range provided in Table 5) coincides with the upper end of the range proposed by Celik and Ellingwood (2008); such a value is the highest among those proposed by the various authors (see Table 2). In order to account for experimental cases in which high values of drift were experienced, the remaining values of γ4, equal to 0.06, 0.07 and 0.08, were taken into consideration

Sensitivity Analysis and Results
Results and Discussion
CONCLUSION
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call