10.06.2013 Views

Analysis and modelling of the seismic behaviour of high ... - Ingegneria

Analysis and modelling of the seismic behaviour of high ... - Ingegneria

Analysis and modelling of the seismic behaviour of high ... - Ingegneria

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

4. SEISMIC RESPONSE OF PARTIAL-STRENGTH COMPOSITE JOINTS<br />

tension). For <strong>the</strong> calculation <strong>of</strong> resistance, <strong>the</strong> actual values <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> yield strength as<br />

well as <strong>the</strong> elasticity modulus <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> material are used.<br />

The rotational stiffness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> spring is determined from <strong>the</strong> flexibilities <strong>of</strong> its basic<br />

components, each represented by its stiffness coefficient kj obtained in according<br />

with <strong>the</strong> Eurocode 3. Moreover, for ductile components an elastic-plastic stiffness<br />

coefficient is used; conversely, for <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r components only an elastic stiffness<br />

coefficient is used. In Figure 4.32 <strong>the</strong> characteristics for <strong>the</strong> two single-sided <strong>and</strong><br />

double-sided beam-to-column joint configurations respectively are shown.<br />

Moreover, <strong>the</strong> moment-rotation relationship for both <strong>the</strong> two joint configurations are<br />

shown in Figure 4.33: <strong>the</strong> calculated rotation capacity limits are in evidence in this<br />

figure. These vertical limits in <strong>the</strong> rotation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> complete joints are due to both <strong>the</strong><br />

rotation capacity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> equivalent T-Stub that model <strong>the</strong> end-plate in bending (±15<br />

mrad), <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> rotation capacity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> column web panel in shear (±35 mrad), as<br />

illustrated in Section 3.5.3.<br />

COMPLETE JOINT MOMENT (kNm)<br />

400<br />

300<br />

200<br />

100<br />

0<br />

-100<br />

-200<br />

-300<br />

-100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100<br />

ROTATION θ (mrad)<br />

COMPLETE JOINT MOMENT (kNm)<br />

400<br />

300<br />

200<br />

100<br />

0<br />

-100<br />

-200<br />

-300<br />

-100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100<br />

ROTATION θ (mrad)<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 4.33. Moment-rotation relationship for <strong>the</strong> two joint configurations: (a) CJ-INT Joint;<br />

(b) CJ-EXT joint<br />

The analytical models are <strong>the</strong>n compared with <strong>the</strong> experimental results. The<br />

attention is hence focused on <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se data for checking <strong>the</strong> general<br />

validity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> joint model by component with reference to <strong>the</strong> approximation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

monotonic <strong>and</strong> cyclic response.<br />

With regard to <strong>the</strong> specimen CJ-INT <strong>the</strong> overall M-θ relationship is compared in<br />

Figure 4.34. Under sagging bending moment <strong>the</strong> analytical model tends to<br />

overestimate <strong>the</strong> experimental response <strong>and</strong> is not able to capture <strong>the</strong> loss <strong>of</strong><br />

resistance due to <strong>the</strong> crushing <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> concrete slab in compression around <strong>the</strong><br />

column flange. Similar results are obtained under hogging bending moment, due to<br />

139

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!