Advertisement

International Journal of Steel Structures

, Volume 18, Issue 5, pp 1639–1653 | Cite as

Evaluation of Three Support Shapes on Behavior of New Bolted Connection BBCC in Modularized Prefabricated Steel Structures

  • Alifazl Azizi Naserabad
  • Mohammad Reza Ghasemi
  • Naser Shabakhty
  • Hammed Ghohani Arab
Article
  • 33 Downloads

Abstract

Bolted connections are suitable due to high quality prefabrication in the factory and erection in the workplace. Prefabrication and modularization cause high speed of erection and fabrication, high quality and quick return of investment. Their technical hitches transportation can be removed by prefabrication of joints and small fabrication of components. Box-columns are suitable members for bolted structures such as welded steel structures with moment frames in two directions etc., but their continual fabrication in multi-story buildings and performing the internal continuity plate in them will cause some practical dilemmas. The details of the proposal technique introduced here, is to remove such problems from the box columns. Besides, some other advantages include new prefabricated bolted beam-to-column connections referred to BBCC. This connection is a set of plates joined to columns, beams, support, and bolts. For a better understanding of its fabrication and erection techniques, two connection and one structural maquettes are made. The present work aims to study the cyclic behavior of connection numerically. To verify the accuracy of model, a similar tested connection was modelled. Its verification was then made through comparison with test results. The behavior of connection was evaluated for an exterior connection using three different support shapes. The effects of support shapes on rigidity, ductility, rotation capacity, maximum strength, four rad rotation strength were compared to those of the AISC seismic provision requirements. It was found that single beams support has all the AISC seismic provision requirements for special moment frames with and without a continuity plate, and box with continuity plate is the best support in the BBCC connection.

Keywords

Bolted connection Modular prefabricated Finite element analysis Cyclic load Box column 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of the University of Sistan and Baluchestan that made this research possible.

References

  1. ABAQUS. (2017). User’s manual version 2017. Pawtucket, RI: Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Abidelah, A., Bouchaïr, A., & Kerdal, D. E. (2012). Experimental and analytical behavior of bolted end-plate connections with or without stiffeners. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 76, 13–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. AISC, ANSI 341. (2010). Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings. Chicago, IL: American Institute of Steel Construction Inc.Google Scholar
  4. AISC, ANSI360. (2010). Specification for structural steel buildings. Chicago, IL: American Institute of Steel Construction Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Azizi Naserabad, A., Ghasemi, M. R., Shabakhty, N., & Ghohani Arab, H. (2015). Patent “prefabricated BBCC connection for using in bolted steel structures”. Patent Office, Tehran, Iran, Patent Record Number 86310.Google Scholar
  6. Chen, C. C., Lin, C. C., & Tsai, C. L. (2004). Evaluation of reinforced connections between steel beams and box columns. Engineering Structures, 26, 1889–1904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dubina, D., & Stratan, A. (2002). Behavior of welded connections of moment resisting frames beam-to-column joints. Engineering Structures, 24, 1431–1440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fang, C., Yam, M. C. H., Lam, A. C. C., & Xie, L. (2014). Cyclic performance of extended end-plate connections equipped with shape memory alloy bolts. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 94, 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gerami, M., Saberi, H., Saberi, V., & Saedi Daryan, A. (2011). Cyclic behavior of bolted connections with different arrangement of bolts. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 67, 690–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gholami, M., Deylami, A., & Tehranizadeh, M. (2013). Seismic performance of flange plate connections between steel beams and box columns. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 84, 36–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Grimsmo, E. L., Clausen, A. H., Langseth, M., & Aalberg, A. (2015). An experimental study of static and dynamic behaviour of bolted end-plate joints of steel. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 85, 132–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu, X. C., Pu, S. H., Zhang, A. L., Xu, A. X., Ni, Z., Sun, Y., et al. (2015a). Static and seismic experiment for bolted-welded joint in modularized prefabricated steel structure. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 115, 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Liu, X. C., Pu, S. H., Zhang, A. L., & Zhan, X. X. (2017). Performance analysis and design of bolted connections in modularized prefabricated steel structures. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 115, 360–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu, X. C., Xu, A. X., Zhang, A. L., Ni, Z., Wang, H. X., & Wu, L. (2015b). Static and seismic experiment for welded joints in modularized prefabricated steel structure. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 112, 183–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maggi, Y. I., Gonçalves, R. M., Leon, R. T., & Ribeiro, L. F. L. (2005). Parametric analysis of steel bolted end plate connections using finite element modeling. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 61, 689–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mirghaderi, S. R., Torabian, S., & Keshavarzi, F. (2010). I-beam to box–column connection by a vertical plate passing through the column. Engineering Structures, 32, 2034–2048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mirghaderil, S. R., & Dehghani Renani, M. (2008). The rigid seismic connection of continuous beams to column. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 64, 1516–1529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Prinz, G. S., Nussbaumer, A., Borges, L., & Khadka, S. (2014). Experimental testing and simulation of bolted beam-column connections having thick extended endplates and multiple bolts per row. Engineering Structures, 59, 434–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rezaeian, A., Jamal-Omidi, M., & Shahidi, F. (2014). Seismic behavior of ConXL rigid connection in box-columns not filled with concrete. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 97, 79–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Simoes-da-Silva, L., Lima, L., Vellasco, P., Dendrade, S., & DeCastro, R. A. (2008). Nonlinear dynamic analysis of steel portal frames with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures, 30, 2566–2579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tagawa, H., & Liu, Y. (2014). Stiffening of bolted end-plate connections with steel member assemblies. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 103, 190–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Torabian, S., Mirghaderi, S. R., & Keshavarzi, F. (2012). Moment-connection between I-beam and built-up square column by a diagonal through plate. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 70, 385–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wang, J., & Guo, S. (2012). Structural performance of blind bolted end plate joints to concrete-filled thin-walled steel tubular columns. Thin-Walled Structures, 60, 54–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Steel Construction 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alifazl Azizi Naserabad
    • 1
  • Mohammad Reza Ghasemi
    • 1
  • Naser Shabakhty
    • 2
  • Hammed Ghohani Arab
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of Sistan and BaluchestanZahedanIran
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringIran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations