Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Retrofit of non-seismically designed beam-column joints by post-tensioned superelastic shape memory alloy bars

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A series of tests on three full-scale substandard exterior beam-column joints were performed to investigate the efficiency of the proposed retrofit configuration, which is the use of externally applied post-tensioned shape memory alloy (SMA) bars. A major group of structural deficiencies resulting from lack of shear reinforcement in the joint, use of low strength concrete and plain round bars were taken into account in the construction of test specimens. While the reference specimen represents the as-built subassembly, the other two were retrofitted by the post-tensioned SMA and steel bars to compare the contribution of superelastic and conventional material on the response. The specimens were exposed to quasi-static cyclic loading up to 8% drift ratio to simulate an intensive level of seismic hazard. The reference specimen underwent a brittle shear failure as excessive cracks mostly concentrated in the joint panel while there was almost no damage in the rest of the RC components. A joint failure with enhanced response quantities was observed in the specimen retrofitted by post-tensioned steel bars. The specimen incorporating the retrofit solution via post-tensioned SMA bars was capable of performing an adequate performance and promoting minimization of the damage in the joint panel, which results in more ductile behavior. The hysteretic response of the SMA retrofitted specimen was validated with a refined numerical model in ATENA Science software. Experimentally observed response was also verified by an analytical model based on fracture mechanics considering the nonlinear behavior of plain concrete under tension. Due to inherent uncertainties in material constitutive laws, the analytical model was evolved to a stochastic level to propose a more advanced model for estimating the capacity of the reference and retrofitted joint. It is found that the experimental results were within the prominent range of Probability Density Functions (i.e. mean ± 1 SD) of the estimated joint tensile stress especially for the shear damaged specimens.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

α:

Angle of the post-tension rod

Ac :

Gross cross-sectional area of column, beam and joint

Af :

Austenite finish temperature, where the material is completely in the austenite phase

c1, c2 :

Material constants

ΔFd1,2 :

Change in post-tension force

∆l:

Elongation of the bar under axial load

∆u :

Ultimate displacement that corresponds 20% reduction of maximum lateral load

∆ *u :

Ultimate drift ratio that corresponds 20% reduction of maximum lateral load

∆y :

Yield displacement of specimens

∆ *y :

Yield drift ratio of specimens

E:

Dissipated energy

εcr :

Concrete cracking strain

fc :

Cylindrical concrete compressive at experiment date

Fc1 :

Compressive force in the concrete due to bending moment

fct :

Concrete tensile strength

Fs1 :

Compressive force in the beam top reinforcement due to bending moment

Gf :

Fracture energy of concrete

G *f :

Sum of strain energy and fracture energy of concrete

H:

Crack band width

K:

Initial stiffness

Kp :

Peak to peak stiffness

µ:

Ductility

P:

Axial force in one post-tension rod

σ:

Stress in crack cohesion

σt :

Experimental value of principal tensile strength in joint

σc :

Experimental value of principal compression strength in joint

τj :

Joint shear strength

T1 :

Tensile force in the beam reinforcement

Up :

Energy stored in the bar per area

Vc1 :

Column shear force

Vj :

Joint shear force corresponds the concrete tensile strength

Vjmax :

Joint shear force corresponds the beam plastic flexure capacity

Vmax :

Maximum lateral load that observed during experiment

Vy :

Yield load of specimens

w:

Crack width

wc :

Crack width at complete release of stress

g:

Maximum aggregate size

References

  • ACI 318M–11 (2011) Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary (aci 318m-11). American Concrete Institute, Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  • ACI 374.1-05 (2005) Acceptance criteria for moment frames based on structural testing and commentary (aci 374.1-05). American Concrete Institute, Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  • ATENA Program Documentation, Part 1 (2014) Atena theory manual, Cervenka Consulting. http://www.cervenka.cz/

  • ATENA Program Documentation, Part 8 (2015) User’s manuel for ATENA-GID Interface

  • Bazant Z, Oh B (1983) Crack band theory for fracture of concrete. Mater Struct 16:155–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickford JH (1995) An introduction to the design and behavior of bolted joints, vol 3. Taylor & Francis Group, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Biddah A, Ghobarah A, Aziz TS (1997) Upgrading of nonductile reinforced concrete frame connections. J Struct Eng 123:1001–1010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bull D, Kam WY, Pampanin S (2009) Experimental validation of selective weakening approach for the seismic retrofit of exterior beam-column joints. In: New Zealand society of earthquake engineering (NZSEE) conference Christchurch, New Zealand

  • Calvi GM, Magenes G, Pampanin S (2002) Relevance of beam-column joint damage and collapse in RC frame assessment. J Earthq Eng 6:75–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460209350433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CEB-FIP Model Code (2010) Comittee Euro-International du Beton. Bulletin d’information 229:33

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervenka V (1985) Constitutive model for cracked reinforced concrete. ACI 82:877–882

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Q, Andrawes B (2017) Cyclic stress–strain behavior of concrete confined with NiTiNb-shape memory alloy spirals. J Struct Eng 143:04017008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung PC, Paulay T, Park R (1991) New Zealand tests on full-scale reinforced concrete beam-column-slab subassemblages designed for earthquake resistance. Spec Publ 123:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Del Vecchio C, Di Ludovico M, Balsamo A et al (2014) Experimental investigation of exterior RC beam-column joints retrofitted with FRP systems. J Compos Constr 18:04014002. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Vecchio C, Di Ludovico M, Prota A, Manfredi G (2015) Analytical model and design approach for FRP strengthening of non-conforming RC corner beam–column joints. Eng Struct 87:8–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.01.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Vecchio C, Di Ludovico M, Balsamo A, Prota A (2017) Seismic retrofit of real beam-column joints using fiber reinforced cement (FRC) composites. J Struct Eng Press. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duran B, Tunaboyu O, Avşar Ö (2017) Determination of elasticity modulus of low strength concrete and its effect on the risk assessment results by DSVB. J Fac Eng Archit Gazi Univ 32:253–264. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.300617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EN 1992-1-1 (2004) Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures-part 1–1: general rules and rules for buildings

  • Gao N, Jeon J-S, Hodgson DE, DesRoches R (2016) An innovative seismic bracing system based on a superelastic shape memory alloy ring. Smart Mater Struct 25:055030. https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/25/5/055030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia R, Pilakoutas K, Hajirasouliha I et al (2017) Seismic retrofitting of RC buildings using CFRP and post-tensioned metal straps: shake table tests. Bull Earthq Eng 15:3321–3347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9800-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardone D, Dolce M, Ponzo FC, Coelho E (2004) Experimental behaviour of r/c frames retrofitted with dissipating and re-centring braces. J Earthq Eng 8:361–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460409350493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadi MNS, Tran TM (2016) Seismic rehabilitation of reinforced concrete beam–column joints by bonding with concrete covers and wrapping with FRP composites. Mater Struct 49:467–485. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-014-0511-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassan WM (2011) Analytical and experimental assessment of seismic vulnerability of beam-column joints without transverse reinforcement in concrete buildings. PhD Thesis. Berkeley, University of California, USA

  • Hillerborg A, Modeer M, Petersson P (1976) Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements. Cem Concr Res 6:773–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hordijk DA (1991) Local approach to fatigue of concrete, Ph.D. Dissertations, Delf University of Technology, Netherlands

  • Ilki A, Bedirhanoglu I, Kumbasar N (2011) Behavior of FRP-Retrofitted joints built with plain bars and low-strength concrete. J Compos Constr 15:312–326. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joint Committee on Structural Safety (2000) Probabilistic model code, part 3: material properties. http://www.jcss.byg.dtu.dk

  • Kam WY, Quintana Gallo P, Akguzel U, Pampanin S (2010) Influence of slab on the seismic response of sub-standard detailed exterior reinforced concrete beam column joints. In: The ninth U.S. national and tenth Canadian conference on earthquake engineering

  • Kollegger J, Mehlhorn G (1988) Experimentelle und Analytische Untersuchungen zur Aufstellung eines Materialmodels für Gerissene Stahbetonscheiben. Nr. 6 Forschungsbericht, Massivbau, Gesamthochschule Kassel

  • Kolmar W (1986) Beschreibung der Kraftuebertragung über Risse in nichtlinearen Finite- Element-Berechnungen von Stahlbetontragwerken. Dissertation, T.H. Darmstadt

  • Kotsovou G, Mouzakis H (2012) Exterior RC beam-column joints: new design approach. Eng Struct 41:307–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.03.049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menetrey P, Willam KJ (1995) Triaxial failure criterion for concrete and its generalization. ACI Struct J 92:311–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirzabagheri S, Tasnimi AA, Soltani Mohammadi M (2016) Behavior of interior RC wide and conventional beam-column roof joints under cyclic load. Eng Struct 111:333–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.12.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novák D, Vořechovský M, Rusina R (2015) FReET v.1.5-program documentation. User´s and theory guides. http://www.freet.cz. Brno/Červenka Consulting, Czech Republic

  • Ozbulut OE, Hurlebaus S, Desroches R (2011) Seismic response control using shape memory alloys: a review. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 22:1531–1549. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X11411220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pampanin S, Christopoulos C, Chen T-H (2006) Development and validation of a metallic haunch seismic retrofit solution for existing under-designed RC frame buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 35:1739–1766. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pantelides CP, Hansen J, Nadauld JD, Reaveley LD (2002) Assessment of reinforced concrete building exterior joints with substandard details. Technical Report PEER 2002-18, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), University of California, Berkeley, CA

  • Park R (1989) Evaluation of ductility of structures and structural assemblages from laboratory testing. N Z Nat Soc Earthq Eng Bull 22:155–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Pohoryles DA (2016) Realistic FRP seismic strengthening schemes for interior reinforced concrete beam-column joints. PhD Thesis, University College London, London, England

  • Pohoryles DA, Rossetto T (2014) A critical evaluation of current design guidelines for the seismic retrofit of beam-column joints with FRP. In: Proceedings of the 2nd second european conference on earthquake engineering and seismology, second European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology

  • Pohoryles DA, Rossetto T, Melo J, Varum H (2016) A combined FRP and selective weakening retrofit for realistic pre-1970’s RC structures. In: 1st international conference on natural hazards and infrastructure (ICONHIC2016), Chania, Greece

  • Priestley MJN (1997) Displacement-based seismic assessment of reinforced concrete buildings. J Earthq Eng 1:157–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469708962365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pukl R, Sajdlova T, Routil L et al (2016) Case study-nonlinear reliability analysis of a concrete bridge. In: Maintenance, monitoring, safety, risk and resilience of bridges and bridge networks : proceedings of the 8th international conference on bridge maintenance, safety and management, IABMAS 2016

  • Rankine W (1857) On the stability of loose earth. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 147:9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossetto T, Pohoryles DA (2017) The effect of slab and transverse beams on the behaviour of full-scale pre-1970’s RC beam-column joints. In: 16th world conference on earthquake (16WCEE), Santiago, Chile

  • Sasmal S, Nath D (2017) Seismic performance of non-invasive single brace made of steel and shape memory alloy for retrofit of gravity load designed sub-assemblages. Eng Struct 143:316–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.04.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafaei J, Hosseini A, Marefat MS (2014) Seismic retrofit of external RC beam–column joints by joint enlargement using prestressed steel angles. Eng Struct 81:265–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.10.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiravand MR, Khorrami Nejad A, Bayanifar MH (2017) Seismic response of RC structures rehabilitated with SMA under near-field earthquakes. Struct Eng Mech 63:497–507. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2017.63.4.497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suhail R, Amato G, Chen J-F, McCrum D (2015) Shape memory alloy features for seismic retrofitting of external RC beam-column joint. In: ANIDIS, Italy

  • TEC (2007) Turkish earthquake code, specification for structures to be built in disaster areas. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement Government of Republic of Turkey, Ankara

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Mier JGM (1986) Multiaxial strain-softening of concrete. Part I: fracture. Mater Struct RILEM 19:190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vecchio FJ, Collins MP (1986) Modified compression-field theory for reinforced concrete beams subjected to shear. ACI J 83:219–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang B, Zhu S (2017) Seismic behavior of self-centering reinforced concrete wall enabled by superelastic shape memory alloy bars. Bull Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0213-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong HF (2005) Shear strength and seismic performance of non-seismically designed reinforced concrete beam-column joints. PhD Thesis, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

  • Yurdakul Ö, Avşar Ö (2017) Experimental investigation of substandard RC beam-column joints retrofitted with external post-tension rods. In: 16th World conference on earthquake (16WCEE), Santiago, Chile

  • Zamani Beydokhti E, Shariatmadar H (2016) Strengthening and rehabilitation of exterior RC beam-column joints using carbon-FRP jacketing. Mater Struct 49:5067–5083. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-016-0844-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Anadolu University Scientific Research Projects Commission under Grant No. 1210F169. This work has been accomplished by using technologies of the Educational and Research Centre in Transport, University of Pardubice.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Transport Structures, Faculty of Transport Engineering, University of Pardubice, Pardubice, 53009, Czech Republic

    Özgür Yurdakul

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Anadolu University, 26555, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Onur Tunaboyu & Özgür Avşar

Authors
  1. Özgür Yurdakul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Onur Tunaboyu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Özgür Avşar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Özgür Yurdakul.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yurdakul, Ö., Tunaboyu, O. & Avşar, Ö. Retrofit of non-seismically designed beam-column joints by post-tensioned superelastic shape memory alloy bars. Bull Earthquake Eng 16, 5279–5307 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0323-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0323-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation