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
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