Cyclic test on a precast reinforced concrete column-to-foundation grouted duct connection

  • Nerio TulliniEmail author
  • Fabio Minghini
Original Research


A full-scale specimen of a column-to-foundation grouted duct connection suited for buildings and industrial structures is tested in cyclic bending combined with axial compression. The positioning of the steel ducts along the sides of the column cross-section allows for using traditional reinforcement cages for the column, with longitudinal bars at both mid-side and corners of the cross-section. Splice length and amount of transverse reinforcement along the splice are defined based on Eurocode 2 provisions for laps of reinforcing bars. A total of 19 loading cycles are carried out, achieving a drift of 5.3% in correspondence of a degradation of 15% of the peak resistance. The shear slip measured at the column-foundation interface results to be smaller than 5% of the deflection. Conversely, to predict accurately the test results, the slip of the projecting bars within their ducts cannot be neglected. It is proposed to take account of this slip by introducing an apparent strain. For the tested specimen, the apparent strain turns out to be equal to the yield strain of the reinforcement. A comparison with a monotonic bending test, previously conducted on the same connection, shows a strongly smaller deformability when the loading protocol is cyclic. Hysteretic energy and drift ductility for the proposed connection are close to those concerning a cast-in-place specimen of comparable capacity, which was described in a recent paper. The test results show an over-strength of 1.4 and a gain in ductility of 1.8 compared with the design values of bending resistance and curvature ductility computed for the cross-section at the column-foundation interface.


Precast concrete column Column-to-foundation connection Grouted duct connection Cyclic test Ductility Bar slip 



The present investigation was developed in the framework of the Research Program FAR 2019 of the University of Ferrara. Moreover, the analyses were carried out within the activities of the (Italian) University Network of Seismic Engineering Laboratories–ReLUIS in the research program funded by the (Italian) National Civil Protection—Progetto Esecutivo 2019/21—WP2. The test specimen was provided by Prefabbricati Morri srl in Rimini, Italy. A special acknowledgement is due to Dr. Luisfilippo Lanza and Mr. Roberto Mazza for their contribution to the preparation of the experimental test, and to Dr. Massimo Vichi for the video editing.

Supplementary material

10518_2019_766_MOESM1_ESM.avi (123.1 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (AVI 126084 kb)


  1. ACI (American Concrete Institute) (2013) ACI 374—Guide for testing reinforced concrete structural elements under slowly applied simulated seismic loads. Farmington Hills, MIGoogle Scholar
  2. Ameli MJ, Pantelides CP (2017) Seismic analysis of precast concrete bridge columns connected with grouted splice sleeve connectors. J Struct Eng 143(2):04016176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ameli MJ, Brown DN, Parks JE, Pantelides CP (2016) Seismic column-to-footing connections using grouted splice sleeves. ACI Struct J 113(5):1021–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belleri A, Riva P (2012) Seismic performance and retrofit of precast concrete grouted sleeve connections. PCI J 57(1):97–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belleri A, Brunesi E, Nascimbene R, Pagani M, Riva P (2015) Seismic performance of precast industrial facilities following major earthquakes in the Italian territory. J Perform Constr Facil 29(5):04014135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bovo M, Savoia M (2018) Numerical simulation of seismic-induced failure of a precast structure during the Emilia earthquake. J Perform Constr Facil 32(1):04017119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruggeling ASG, Huyghe GF (1991) Prefabrication with concrete. A. A Balkema, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  8. Buratti N, Bacci L, Mazzotti C (2014) Seismic behaviour of grouted sleeve connections between foundations and precast columns. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology. Istanbul, August 25–29Google Scholar
  9. Buratti N, Minghini F, Ongaretto E, Savoia M, Tullini N (2017) Empirical seismic fragility for the precast RC industrial buildings damaged by the 2012 Emilia (Italy) earthquakes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46(14):2317–2335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. CEB (Euro-International Committee for Structural Concrete) (1998) CEB-FIP model code 1990—Design code, 2nd edn. Thomas Telford, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. CEN (European Committee for Standardization) (2004a) EN 1992-1-1:2004, Eurocode 2—Design of concrete structures—Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. CEN, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  12. CEN (European Committee for Standardization) (2004b) EN 1998-1:2004, Eurocode 8—Design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. CEN, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  13. Dal Lago B, Toniolo G, Lamperti Tornaghi M (2016) Influence of different mechanical column-foundation connection devices on the seismic behaviour of precast structures. Bull Earthq Eng 14(12):3485–3508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Demartino C, Vanzi I, Monti G, Sulpizio C (2018) Precast industrial buildings in Southern Europe: loss of support at frictional beam-to-column connections under seismic actions. Bull Earthq Eng 16(1):259–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elliott KS (2017) Precast concrete structures, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  16. FEMA (Federal Management Emergency Agency) (2000) FEMA 356—Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  17. FIB (International Federation for Structural Concrete) (2003) Seismic design of precast concrete building structures, Bulletin No. 27, ISBN 978-2-88394-067-3Google Scholar
  18. FIB (International Federation for Structural Concrete) (2016) Precast-concrete buildings in seismic areas, Bulletin No. 78, ISBN 978-2-88394-118-2Google Scholar
  19. Hua LJ, Rahman ABA, Ibrahim IS (2014) Feasibility study of grouted splice connector under tensile load. Constr Build Mater 50:530–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. IMIT (Italian Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport) (2018) Italian Building Code-D.M. 17/01/2018, Rome (in Italian)Google Scholar
  21. Kuttab AS, Dougill JW (1988) Grouted and dowelled jointed precast concrete columns—behaviour in combined bending and compression. Magazine of Concrete Research 40(144):131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu Y, Zhou B, Cai J, Sang-Hoon Lee D, Deng X, Feng J (2018) Experimental study on seismic behavior of precast concrete column with grouted sleeve connections considering ratios of longitudinal reinforcement and stirrups. Bull Earthq Eng. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Megalooikonomou KG, Tastani SP, Pantazopoulou SJ (2018) Effect of yield penetration on column plastic hinge length. Eng Struct 156:161–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Minghini F, Ongaretto E, Ligabue V, Savoia M, Tullini N (2016) Observational failure analysis of precast buildings after the 2012 Emilia earthquakes. Earthq Struct 11(2):327–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Negro P, Toniolo G (2012) Design guidelines for connections of precast structures under seismic actions. EUR—Scientific and Technical Research Reports. JRC Publication No. JRC71599. Publications Office of the European Union.
  26. NI (National Instruments) (2015) LabVIEW 2015 Help. Available at Accessed 23 Feb 2015
  27. Park R (1988) Ductility evaluation from laboratory and analytical testing (State-of-the-Art Report). In: Proceedings of the 9th world conference on earthquake engineering. Tokyo-Kyoto, August 2–9Google Scholar
  28. Park R (1995) Perspective on the seismic design of precast concrete structures in New Zealand. PCI J 40(3):40–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. PEER (Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center) (2004) Structural performance database user’s manual, University of Berkeley. Accessed 1 July 2018
  30. Popa V, Papurcu A, Cotofana D, Pascu R (2015) Experimental testing on emulative connections for precast columns using grouted corrugated steel sleeves. Bull Earthq Eng 13(8):2429–2447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Priestley MJN, Calvi GM, Kowalsky MJ (2007) Displacement-based seismic design of structures. Pavia IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  32. Rave-Arango JF, Blandón CA, Restrepo JI, Carmona F (2018) Seismic performance of precast concrete column-to-column lap-splice connections. Eng Struct 172:687–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Raynor DJ, Lehman DE, Stanton JF (2002) Bond-slip response of reinforcing bars grouted in ducts. ACI Struct J 99(5):568–576Google Scholar
  34. Savoia M, Buratti N, Vincenzi L (2017) Damages and collapses in industrial precast buildings after the 2012 Emilia earthquake. Eng Struct 137:162–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sezen H, Whittaker AS (2006) Seismic performance of industrial facilities affected by the 1999 Turkey earthquake. J Perform of Constr Facil 20(1):28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Toniolo G, Colombo A (2012) Precast concrete structures: the lessons learned from L’Aquila earthquake. Struct Concr 13(2):73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tullini N, Minghini F (2016) Grouted sleeve connections used in precast reinforced concrete construction - Experimental investigation of a column-to-column joint. Eng Struct 127:784–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Verderame GM, Fabbrocino G, Manfredi G (2008a) Seismic response of r.c. columns with smooth reinforcement. Part I: Monotonic tests. Eng Struct 30(9):2277–2288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Verderame GM, Fabbrocino G, Manfredi G (2008b) Seismic response of r.c. columns with smooth reinforcement. Part II: Cyclic tests. Eng Struct 30(9):2289–2300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yan Q, Chen T, Xie Z (2018) Seismic experimental study on a precast concrete beam-column connection with grout sleeves. Eng Struct 155:330–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yanev P (1989) Performance of industrial facilities. Earthq Spectra 5(3):101–113Google Scholar
  42. Ying M, Jin-Xin G (2018) Seismic failure modes and deformation capacity of reinforced concrete columns under cyclic loads. Periodica Polytech Civ Eng 62(1):80–91Google Scholar
  43. Yuan H, Zhenggeng Z, Naito CJ, Weijian Y (2017) Tensile behavior of half grouted sleeve connections: experimental study and analytical modeling. Constr Build Mater 152:96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zheng LX (1996) Grouted precast concrete column connections under reversed cyclic bending and compression. ACI Struct J 93(3):247–256Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Engineering DepartmentUniversity of FerraraFerraraItaly

Personalised recommendations