Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An innovative connection proposal for the precast prestressed column-foundation connection

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Materials and Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prefabricated buildings are highly preferred due to their many advantages such as rapid production, low cost. However, it has been seen with the earthquakes in the past years that prefabricated buildings are insufficient in terms of seismic performance because of connection problems of structural members. Therefore, studies about prefabricated connection types have increased in recent years. In this study, an innovative connection was proposed for prefabricated prestressed foundation-column connection that is easy to assemble, preventing workmanship errors, cost and time-effective compared with socket connection. In the study, samples were produced for 5 different connections. The produced 1/2 scale samples were tested under cyclic lateral loading. Structural parameters such as strength, stiffness degradation, ductility, energy dissipation capacity, equivalent viscous damping ratio were obtained from test results. The obtained parameters were interpreted, and the seismic behavior of the samples was compared. As a result, it was seen that the proposed connection provided structural parameters such as sufficient strength and rigidity that can be applied in seismic regions.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Song LL, Guo T, Gu Y, Cao ZL (2015) Experimental study of a self-centering prestressed concrete frame subassembly. Eng Struct 88:176–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.01.040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cai X, Pan Z, Zhu Y, Gong N, Wang Y (2021) Experimental and numerical investigations of self-centering post-tensioned precast beam-to-column connections with steel top and seat angles. Eng Struct 226:111397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cai X, Gong N, Fu CC, Zhu Y, Wu J (2021) Seismic behavior of self-centering prestressed precast concrete frame subassembly using steel top and seat angles. Eng Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cavalieri F, Bellotti D, Nascimbene R (2023) Seismic vulnerability of existing precast buildings with frictional beam-to-column connections, including treatment of epistemic uncertainty. Bull Earthq Eng 21:1117–1138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01574-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brunesi E, Peloso S, Pinho R, Nascimbene R (2019) Shake-table testing of a full-scale two-story precast wall-slab-wall structure. Earthq Spectra 35:1583–1609. https://doi.org/10.1193/072518EQS184M

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bournas DA, Negro P, Taucer FF (2014) Performance of industrial buildings during the Emilia earthquakes in Northern Italy and recommendations for their strengthening. Bull Earthq Eng 12:2383–2404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9466-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 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. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cf.1943-5509.0000617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pul S, Senturk M, Ilki A, Hajirasouliha I (2021) Experimental and numerical investigation of a proposed monolithic-like precast concrete column-foundation connection. Eng Struct 246:113090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.113090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hippola HMSS, Wijesundara KK, Nascimbene R (2022) Response of shear critical reinforced concrete frames and walls under monotonic loading. Eng Struct 251:113483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.113483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brunesi E, Peloso S, Pinho R, Nascimbene R (2019) Cyclic tensile testing of a three-way panel connection for precast wall-slab-wall structures. Struct Concr 20:1307–1315. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201800280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brunesi E, Nascimbene R, Peloso S (2020) Evaluation of the seismic response of precast wall connections: experimental observations and numerical modeling. J Earthq Eng 24:1057–1082. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1469440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Priestley MJN, Sritharan SS, Conley JR, Pampanin S (1999) Preliminary results and conclusions from the PRESSS five-story precast concrete test building. PCI J 44:42–67. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.11011999.42.67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Twigden KM, Sritharan S, Henry RS (2017) Cyclic testing of unbonded post-tensioned concrete wall systems with and without supplemental damping. Eng Struct 140:406–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Koshikawa T (2017) Moment and energy dissipation capacities of post-tensioned precast concrete connections employing a friction device. Eng Struct 138:170–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cheok G, Lew H (1993) Model precast concrete beam-to-column joints subject to cyclic loading. PCI J 38:80–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Priestley MJN, MacRae GA (1996) Seismic tests of precast beam-to-column joint subassemblages with unbonded tendons. PCI J 41:64–81. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.01011996.64.81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Javadi M, Hassanli R, Rahman MM, Karim MR (2021) Self-centring segmental retaining walls—a new construction system for retaining walls. Front Struct Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-021-0737-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Stone WC, Cheok GS, Stanton JF (1995) Performance of hybrid moment-resisting precast beam-column concrete connections subjected to cyclic loading. ACI Struct J 92:229–249. https://doi.org/10.14359/1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Song LL, Guo T, Chen C (2014) Experimental and numerical study of a self-centering prestressed concrete moment resisting frame connection with bolted web friction devices. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 43:529–545. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Solberg K, Dhakal RP, Bradley B, Mander JB, Li L (2008) Seismic performance of damage-protected beam-column joints. ACI Struct J 105:205–214. https://doi.org/10.14359/19736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bradley BA, Dhakal RP, Mander JB, Li L (2008) Experimental multi-level seismic performance assessment of 3D RC frame designed for damage avoidance. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 37:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Morgen BG, Kurama YC (2004) A friction damper for post-tensioned precast concrete moment frames. PCI J 49:112–133. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.07012004.112.133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shen Y, Liu X, Li Y, Li J (2021) Cyclic tests of precast post-tensioned concrete filled steel tubular (PCFT) columns with internal energy-dissipating bars. Eng Struct 229:111651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ishizuka T (1987) Effect of bond deterioration on seismic response of reinforced and partially prestressed concrete ductile moment-resisting frames, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, (Order No. 8810539).

  25. Priestley MJN, Tao JR (1993) Seismic Response of Precast Prestressed Concrete Frames With Partially Debonded Tendons. PCI J 38:58–69. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.01011993.58.69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Thonstad T, Eberhard MO, Stanton JF (2021) Design of prestressed, jointed columns for enhanced seismic performance. Structures 33:1007–1019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.01.105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Restrepo JI, Rahman A (2007) Seismic performance of self-centering structural walls incorporating energy dissipators. J Struct Eng 133:1560. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(2007)133:11(1560)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Billington SL, Yoon JK (2004) Cyclic response of unbonded posttensioned precast columns with ductile fiber-reinforced concrete. J Bridg Eng 9:353–363. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1084-0702(2004)9:4(353)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yamashita R, Sanders DH (2009) Seismic performance of precast unbonded prestressed concrete columns. ACI Struct J 106:821–830. https://doi.org/10.14359/51663183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ou YC, Sen TM, Chang KC, Lee GC (2010) Cyclic behavior of precast segmental concrete bridge columns with high performance or conventional steel reinforcing bars as energy dissipation bars. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39:1181–1198. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Palermo A, Pampanin S, Marriott D (2007) Design, modeling, and experimental response of seismic resistant bridge piers with posttensioned dissipating connections. J Struct Eng 133:1648–1661. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(2007)133:11(1648)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Solberg K, Mashiko N, Mander JB, Dhakal RP (2009) Performance of a damage-protected highway bridge pier subjected to bidirectional earthquake attack. J Struct Eng 135:469–478. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2009)135:5(469)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang Z, Wang J, Zhu J, Zhao G, Zhang J (2020) Energy dissipation and self-centering capacities of posttensioning precast segmental ultra-high performance concrete bridge columns. Struct Concr 21:517–532. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201900024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nguyen W, Trono W, Panagiotou M, Ostertag CP (2017) Seismic response of a rocking bridge column using a precast hybrid fiber-reinforced concrete (HyFRC) tube. Compos Struct 174:252–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.04.058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang J, Wang Z, Tang Y, Liu T, Zhang J (2018) Cyclic loading test of self-centering precast segmental unbonded posttensioned UHPFRC bridge columns. Bull Earthq Eng 16:5227–5255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0331-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Chou CC, Chen YC (2006) Cyclic tests of post-tensioned precast CFT segmental bridge columns with unbonded strands. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 35:159–175. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Guerrini G, Restrepo JI, Massari M, Vervelidis A (2015) Seismic behavior of posttensioned self-centering precast concrete dual-shell steel columns. J Struct Eng 141:4014115. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0001054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. ElGawady M, Booker AJ, Dawood HM (2010) Seismic behavior of posttensioned concrete-filled fiber tubes. J Compos Constr 14:616–628. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cc.1943-5614.0000107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Motaref S, Saiidi MS, Sanders D (2014) Shake table studies of energy-dissipating segmental bridge columns. J Bridg Eng 19:186–199. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)be.1943-5592.0000518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Dal Lago B, Toniolo G, Lamperti TM (2016) Influence of different mechanical column-foundation connection devices on the seismic behaviour of precast structures. Bull Earthq Eng 14:3485–3508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-0010-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang G, Han Q, Xu K, Du X, He W (2021) Experimental investigation of seismic behavior of UHPC-filled socket precast bridge column-foundation connection with shear keys. Eng Struct 228:111527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Qu H, Li T, Wang Z, Wei H, Shen J, Wang H (2018) Investigation and verification on seismic behavior of precast concrete frame piers used in real bridge structures: experimental and numerical study. Eng Struct 154:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.10.069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Fan JJ, Feng DC, Wu G, Hou S, Lu Y (2020) Experimental study of prefabricated RC column-foundation assemblies with two different connection methods and using large-diameter reinforcing bars. Eng Struct 205:110075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.110075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tullini N, Minghini F (2020) Cyclic test on a precast reinforced concrete column-to-foundation grouted duct connection. Bull Earthq Eng 18:1657–1691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00766-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Canha RMF, Ebeling EB, El Debs DCE, El Debs MK (2009) Analysing the base of precast column in socket foundations with smooth interfaces. Mater Struct Constr 42:725–737. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-008-9416-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. ACI-332.1R-06 (2006) Guide to Residential Concrete Construction. Am Concr Inst 2006

  47. Turkish Seismic Code-2018 (TSC-2018)

  48. 3114 TS. Determination of compressive strength of concrete test specimens. Turkish Stand 1998

  49. Cogurcu MT, Uzun M (2021) The taguchi optimization of mechanical and durability properties of accelerator added concrete. J Polytech. https://doi.org/10.2339/politeknik.857525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. TS-500. Requirements for design and construction of reinforced concrete structures. Turkish Stand 2000

  51. Wang Z, Qu H, Li T, Wei H, Wang H, Duan H et al (2018) Quasi-static cyclic tests of precast bridge columns with different connection details for high seismic zones. Eng Struct 158:13–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.12.035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Li T, Qu H, Wang Z, Wei H, Jiang S (2018) Seismic performance of precast concrete bridge columns with quasi-static cyclic shear test for high seismic zones. Eng Struct 166:441–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.03.086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Mahadik V, Sharma A, Hofmann J (2020) Re-evaluation of existing tests on RC connections using post-installed reinforcing bars. Eng Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109970

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Mahadik V, Sharma A, Hofmann J (2021) Cast-in and post-installed rebar anchorage systems in RC column foundation joints: Experimental investigations. Eng Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Saatcioglu M, Ozcebe G (1989) Response of reinforced concrete columns to simulated seismic loading. ACI Struct J. https://doi.org/10.14359/2607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Mahrenholtz C (2012) Seismic bond model for concrete reinforcement and the application to column-to-foundation connections

  57. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA-356) (2000) Prestandard and commentary for seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Washington

  58. Shima C, Lee C (2020) Crack width control of precast deck loop joints for continuous steel-concrete composite girder bridges. Adv Concr Constr 10:21–34. https://doi.org/10.12989/acc.2020.10.1.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. P440A F (2009) Effects of Strength and Stiffness Degradation on Seismic Response. Fema P440a

  61. Lim WY, Hong SG (2014) Cyclic loading tests for precast concrete cantilever walls with C-type connections. Earthq Struct 7:753–777. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2014.7.5.753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Pul S, Hüsem M, Arslan ME, Hamzaçebi S (2014) An experimental study on different socket base connections under cyclic loading. Comput Concr 13:377–387. https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2014.13.3.377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Ni X, Cao S, Li Y, Liang S (2019) Stiffness degradation of shear walls under cyclic loading: experimental study and modelling. Bull Earthq Eng 17:5183–5216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00682-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Zhang X, Chen X, Wang Y, Ding M, Lu J, Ma H (2020) Quasi-static test of the precast-concrete pile foundation for railway bridge construction. Adv Concr Constr 10:49–59. https://doi.org/10.12989/acc.2020.10.1.049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Rodrigues H, Furtado A, Arêde A (2017) Experimental evaluation of energy dissipation and viscous damping of repaired and strengthened RC columns with CFRP jacketing under biaxial load. Eng Struct 145:162–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.05.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wang Z, Ge J, Wei H (2014) Seismic performance of precast hollow bridge piers with different construction details. Front Struct Civ Eng 8:399–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-014-0273-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Park R (1989) Evaluation of ductility of structures and structural assemblages from laboratory testing. Bull New Zeal Soc Earthq Eng 22:155–166. https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.22.3.155-166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Wu M, Liu X, Liu H, Du X (2020) Seismic performance of precast short-leg shear wall using a grouting sleeve connection. Eng Struct 208:110338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110338

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey under project number 120M378 and Konya Technical University of Coordinatorship of Scientific Research Projects under Project Number 201104017.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Karamanoglu Mehmetbey University, Karaman, Turkey

    Mehmet Uzun

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Konya Technical University, Konya, Turkey

    Mustafa Tolga Cogurcu & Mehmet Akif Arslan

Authors
  1. Mehmet Uzun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mustafa Tolga Cogurcu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mehmet Akif Arslan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Akif Arslan.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Uzun, M., Cogurcu, M.T. & Arslan, M.A. An innovative connection proposal for the precast prestressed column-foundation connection. Mater Struct 56, 128 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-023-02218-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-023-02218-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation