Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr

Behavior and strength of steel reinforced concrete beamcolumn joints with two-side force inputs
Cheng-Cheng Chen , Keng-Ta Lin
Department of Construction Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, No. 43, Sec. 4, Keelung Rd, 106, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC

article

info

a b s t r a c t
Experimental results from five large-scale cruciform type beamcolumn subassemblies showed that: (1) the SRC joint demonstrated a more moderate pinching phenomenon than the RC joint; (2) the shear strength provided by the longitudinal flanges of the cross-H steel section was significantly higher than expected; (3) the definition of the joint zone of the SRC column-wide flange beam system should be modified to match experimental observations; and (4) the corner ties can be used to replace joint hoops without demonstrating any negative behavior. It was also found that the strength superposition method was able to predict the SRC joint shear strength with reasonable accuracy. Crown Copyright 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 16 November 2007 Accepted 12 March 2008 Keywords: Steel reinforced concrete (SRC) Beamcolumn joints Earthquake-resistant structures Joints

1. Introduction Steel reinforced concrete (SRC) structural members are composed of concrete, a cross-sectional steel shape, longitudinal steel bars and transverse steel bars. The sections shown in Fig. 1 are two typical SRC column sections and a typical SRC beam section. Similar to a steel structure or a reinforced concrete (RC) structure, the beamcolumn joint of the SRC moment resisting frame (MRF) bears significant shear force when the frame is under earthquake type loading. Thus, the shear design of the SRC beamcolumn joint plays an important role in the seismic design of SRC MRFs. RC beamcolumn joints are classified by ACI-ASCE 352 [1] as interior joints, two types of exterior joints and two types of corner joints as shown in Fig. 2. The appearance and mechanical behavior of SRC beamcolumn joints possess many similarities with those of RC joints; hence, the RC beamcolumn joint classification method is adopted for the SRC beamcolumn joint in this study. SRC beamcolumn joint research was initiated by Wakabayashi [2,3] in Japan. The cross-sectional steel shapes used for the columns were mainly wide flange steel shapes as shown in Fig. 1(a). In recent years, Teraoka et al. [4] examined seven specimens with a cross-H steel shape for columns as shown in Fig. 1(b) with research mainly directed toward examining the effect of the diaphragm scheme proposed by the authors. The Japanese [5] and Taiwanese codes [6] have adopted the concept of superposition for the analysis and design of beamcolumn joints. However, the role of the longitudinal flanges of the cross-H steel shape in the beamcolumn joint, as shown

(a) Column with H steel shape.

(b) Column with XH steel shape.

(c) Beam. Fig. 1. Typical SRC column sections and beam section.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 2 27376589; fax: +886 2 27376606.

E-mail address: c3@mail.ntust.edu.tw (C.-C. Chen).

in Fig. 1(b), remains unclear and requires further investigation. Therefore, the joint shear strength contribution by the longitudinal flanges has usually been neglected. This is likely to result in conservative designs. In recent years, there has been more frequent use of the SRC column-wide flange beam system, in which steel beams are used instead of SRC beams. The shear behavior and shear strength of the beamcolumn joint in such a system has yet to be explored. In this study, five large-scale cruciform type beamcolumn subassemblies were designed, constructed and tested to investigate SRC beamcolumn joint behavior. The contribution of the longitudinal flanges to the joint shear strength is determined and the shear behavior of the beamcolumn joint of the SRC column-wide

0143-974X/$ see front matter Crown Copyright 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.03.010

642 Table 1 Test specimen matrix Specimen Column Member type S-XH SRC-XH SRC-XH-TB SRC-H SRC-H-SB Steel SRC SRC SRC SRC

C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

Beam Steel shape XH XH XH H H Steel SRC SRC SRC Steel

Transverse beam

Joint

SRC

Exterior Type II Exterior Type II Interior Exterior Type II Exterior Type II

(a) Interior Joint.

(b) Exterior Joint I.

(c) Exterior Joint II.

(a) With H steel shape.

(b) With XH steel shape.

(c) Pure XH steel shape.

Fig. 4. Column sections used (unit: mm). (d) Corner Joint I. (e) Corner Joint II.

Fig. 2. Types of beamcolumn joints.

(a) Steel beam.

(b) SRC beam.

(c) Transverse beam.

Fig. 5. Beam sections used (unit: mm).

2. Experimental program 2.1. Test specimens Table 1 shows the test matrix for the experimental study that included four beamcolumn subassemblies containing a Type II exterior joint and one beamcolumn subassembly containing an interior joint. The geometry and dimensions of the specimens are shown in Fig. 3. Assuming that the inflection points were at the mid-span of the beams and mid-height of the columns, the subassemblies, along with boundary and loading conditions, simulate part of a frame subjected to an earthquake-induced moment. Specimen S-XH contained a steel beamcolumn joint and each of the other specimens contained an SRC beamcolumn joint. Shear forces were applied to the joint at the two opposing sides of the column for all specimens. The column cross-sectional steel shape used for the SRC-H and SRC-H-SB specimens were wide flange sections, H390 180 6 20, as shown in Fig. 4(a). The column cross-sectional steel shape used for the SRC-XH-TB, SRC-XH and S-XH specimens was a cross-H section, XH390 180 6 20, as shown in Fig. 4(b) and (c). The XH390 180 6 20 section was composed of two H390 180 6 20 sections that intersected perpendicularly at the mid-height of the webs. The beam cross-sectional steel shape used for all the specimens was H300 180 12 22 as shown in Fig. 5(a). Complete joint penetration welds connected the beam flanges and the column flanges. Six ASTM A490 high-strength bolts connected the beam web with the column flange as shown in

(a) Elevation view.

(b) Top view. Fig. 3. Geometry and dimensions of test specimens (unit: mm).

flange beam system is investigated. Additionally, the applicability and accuracy of the strength superposition method to predict beamcolumn joint shear strength are assessed.

C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

643

(a) Elevation.

(b) Section AA. Fig. 6. Connection details for wide flange column and beams (unit: mm).

(a) Elevation.

(b) Section AA. Fig. 7. Connection details for the XH column with wide flange beams (unit: mm).

Figs. 6(a) and 7(a). At the beam flange levels, continuity plates or diaphragm plates were inserted into the column as shown in Figs. 6 and 7. Complete joint penetration welds were then used to connect the diaphragm plates or the continuity plates to the column flanges and webs. The dimensions of the SRC column sections were 480 mm 480 mm as shown in Fig. 4(a) and (b). Four #10 longitudinal steel bars and #4 transverse hoops with a spacing of 100 mm were used for all the SRC columns. In the beamcolumn joints of the SRC specimens, corner ties, instead of hoops, were used to provide lateral support to the longitudinal steel bars as well as to confine the concrete at the corners. #3 steel bars with standard 180 hooks were used for corner ties. The corner ties were especially designed for use in the joints to reduce the possible difficulties encountered in placing hoops. The SRC-XH-TB specimen used corner ties as the design intended and the other SRC specimens used corner ties to enable direct comparison between specimens. Fig. 8 illustrates the details of the beamcolumn joints of all the specimens. SRC beams, as shown in Fig. 5(b), were used for the longitudinal beams of SRC-XH, SRC-H and SRC-XH-TB specimens. SRC beams, as shown in Fig. 5(c), were used for the transverse beams of the SRCXH-TB specimen. Pure steel beams, as shown in Fig. 5(a) were used for the longitudinal beams of SRC-H-SB. All the cross-sectional steel shapes used were manufactured using ASTM A572 Grade 50 steel plates and all the steel bars used were ASTM A706 steel bars. The mechanical properties of the steel plates and bars are listed in Table 2 and the compressive strength of the concrete at the time of testing is listed in Table 4.

Table 2 Mechanical properties of the steels used Steel 6 mm-thick plate 12 mm-thick plate 20 mm-thick plate 22 mm-thick plate #3 bar #4 bar #6 bar #10 bar Yield stress (MPa) 495 437 378 392 505 511 510 464 Tensile strength (MPa) 647 573 518 512 737 703 710 649

2.2. Test setup and procedure The test setup scheme is shown in Fig. 9. Using a pinned connection, the bottom end of the specimen was connected to a base beam that was tied down to a strong floor. Each beam end was connected to an axial link with the other end of the axial link connected to the base beam. The top end of the specimen was connected to a servo-controlled actuator while the other end of the actuator was connected to the reaction wall. The actuator had a capacity of 1000 kN and was equipped with a built-in load cell and a linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) to measure the force P and the displacement at the load point. The longitudinal web and one of the longitudinal flanges of the cross-H section of S-XH were equipped with 3-axis rosettes, as shown in Fig. 8(a), to undertake the measurements of shear strain.

644 Table 3 Test results of the specimens Specimen S-XH SRC-XH SRC-XH-TB SRC-H SRC-H-SB
+ Ppeak (kN)

C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

+ (%) peak
+2.79 +2.98 +3.00 +2.96 +2.96

Ppeak (kN)

(%) peak
1.96 2.96 2.95 2.95 2.00

Pt (kN)

Mb (kN m)

Vb (kN)

Vt (kN)

+230 +586 +614 +421 +243

198 589 673 413 242

214 588 644 417 243

275 759 831 538 313

1124 2438 2684 1700 1198

2033 4288 4724 2984 2152

Table 4 Shear strength predictions for specimens with the SRC column Specimen
Vt

RC portion

Steel portion
b h bj Aj Vrc Vsw Vsw Vslf

Vtotal

(kN)

(kN)

Vt Vtotal

Vsrc

(kN)

Vt Vsrc

fc

(MPa)

(mm)

(mm)

(mm)

(mm2 ) 230 400 230 400 230 400 187 200

(kN)

(kN)

(kN)

(kN) 1089 1089 3452 3962 2492 1905 1.24 1.19 1.20 1.13 3260 3770 2300 1713 1.32 1.25 1.30 1.26

SRC-XH SRC-XH-TB SRC-H SRC-H-SB

4288 4724 2984 2152

1.25 28.8 1.67 28.5 1.25 33.8 1.00 33.8

400 400 400 180

480 480 480 390

480 480 480 480

1547 2056 1675 1089

624 624 624 624

816 816 816 816

3. Experimental results 3.1. General behavior Fig. 11 illustrates the load versus drift angle hysteresis loops of all the specimens. The response quantities for the test specimens are listed in Table 3. The maximum loads in the positive + and Ppeak direction and negative direction are designated as Ppeak + are and Ppeak respectively. The drift angles corresponding to Ppeak + designated as peak and peak respectively. The specimen strength + Pt of each specimen is defined as the average of Ppeak and Ppeak . According to equilibrium conditions, the reaction force R at the beam ends (Fig. 3(a)) can be obtained using Eq. (1) and the beam bending moment at the column surface Mb can be obtained with Eq. (2).
R = 2.93P /4.05 Mb = R Lb

(a) S-XH.

(1) (2)

where P is the applied load and Lb is the length, as indicated in Fig. 3(a).
(b) SRC-XH. (c) SRC-XH-TB.

(d) SRC-H.

(e) SRC-H-SB.

Fig. 8. Details of specimens in the beamcolumn joint area.

Two LVDTs were used, as shown in Fig. 13(b), to measure the joint shear deformation of the SRC joints. All specimens were loaded under displacement control with the same drift angle history as shown in Fig. 10. The drift angle is defined as the ratio of the horizontal displacement to the specimen height (2930 mm). The load test ended after the strength of the specimen dropped below 80% of the maximum load reached by the specimen.

3.1.1. S-XH specimen A total of 12 cycles were applied to the pure steel specimen with a maximum drift angle of 4% as shown in Fig. 11(a). The specimen was basically within the elastic range during the 0.25% and 0.5% drift angle cycles. Indication of yielding on the longitudinal web was observed during the first cycle at a drift angle of 1%. The specimen underwent stable yielding during the 1% and 2% drift angle stages. During the first +3% drift angle cycle, cracks were observed at the welds. These are indicated as C1 and C2 in Fig. 12. When the drift angle reached +2.79%, the load suddenly dropped from +230 to +157 kN. This was caused by the abrupt extension of the cracks at positions C1 and C2. As the load reversed direction and reached the 1.83% drift angle, the load suddenly dropped from 199 to 155 kN. Cracks at the weld, indicated as C3 in Fig. 12, were observed. + The Ppeak (199 kN) was 13% lower than Ppeak (+230 kN). Furthermore, the peak (1.83%) was also lower than the + peak (+2.79%). The failure of the specimen in the negative direction

C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

645

Fig. 9. Test setup.

Fig. 10. Loading history.

was somewhat premature and the Ppeak value may slightly underestimate the specimen strength. However, from Fig. 13(a), the longitudinal web of the cross-H section can be observed to have extensively yielded under shear.

3.1.2. SRC-XH and SRC-H specimens Both the SRC-XH and SRC-H specimens contained an SRC exterior Type II joint and the strengths of these specimens were much higher than that of the S-XH specimen. During the test, the occurrence of slips between the end plate and the connection plate, as indicated in Fig. 9, were observed. These slips induced a sudden load drop and the load versus drift angle hysteresis loops were relatively unsmooth. The slips also introduced an additional displacement to the specimen but they had basically no effect on the specimen strength. A total of 18 and 14 cycles were applied to the SRC-XH and SRCH specimens respectively. Cracks in the joint were first observed during the 0.25% cycle for both the specimens. Fig. 14(a) and (b) show the crack patterns of the two specimens during peak loads. Both specimens developed diagonal cracks similar to those in the RC joints [7,8]. For each specimen, two major diagonal cracks were identified with each starting from one corner of the joint and extending diagonally to the other corner of the joint. The strength Pt of the SRC-XH specimen (588 kN) was 41% higher than that of SRC-H (417 kN). The use of a cross-H section

Fig. 11. Load versus displacement hysteresis loops.

provided significantly more strength than the wide flange section. The loaddrift angle hysteresis loops in Fig. 11(b) and (d) reveal that both specimens possessed quite a symmetrical response. Compared to those of the RC joints [7,8], the loaddrift angle hysteresis loops of the SRC specimens were more saturated and dissipated relatively more energy. The load versus joint shear

646

C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

(a) SRC-XH.

. Fig. 12. Condition of the beamcolumn joint region of the S-XH specimen at Ppeak

(b) SRC-H.

Fig. 13. Joint shear deformation hysteresis loops.

deformation hysteresis loops of SRC-XH, as illustrated in Fig. 13(b), also show the characteristics of high-energy dissipation capacity. 3.1.3. SRC-H-SB specimen A total of 16 drift angle cycles were applied to the SRC-H-SB specimen. Due to the lower stiffness of the beams, diagonal shear cracks developed at a larger drift angle cycle (0.5% cycle). Fig. 14(c) + . Two diagonal cracks shows the crack pattern of SRC-H-SB at Ppeak can be identified and the maximum crack width measured was 4 mm. Nevertheless, the diagonal crack pattern of SRC-H-SB is somewhat different from that of SRC-XH and SRC-H. For the cases of the SRC-XH and SRC-H specimens that employed SRC beams, the beamcolumn joint zone can be rationally defined as the intersection area of the beam and the column, as shown by the shaded area in Fig. 15(a). If the same definition of joint zone is used, the major diagonal crack pattern for SRC-H-SB does not match that of SRC-XH and SRC-H. The major diagonal cracks of SRC-H-SB did not extend from corner-to-corner. It is suggested that the joint zone of SRC-H-SB be defined as the area enclosed by the column flanges and the continuity plates as shown in Fig. 15(b). With this modified definition of the joint zone, the major diagonal cracks extend in the pattern of from corner-to-corner as is expected. This modified definition of the joint zone is later applied to calculate the joint shear strength of SRC-H-SB. The Pt of SRC-H-SB was 243 kN, 42% lower than that of SRC-H (417 kN). Without concrete in the beam, much less concrete in the joint was activated to provide shear strength to the joint. 3.1.4. SRC-XH-TB specimen In total 12 cycles were applied to the SRC-XH-TB specimen with a maximum drift angle of 4%. The strength of the SRC-XHTB specimen was the highest among all the specimens examined.
(c) SRC-H-SB.

(d) SRC-XH-TB. Fig. 14. Concrete crack pattern of specimens at peak load.

Therefore, slips between the end plate and the connection plate and a sudden load drop were observed to occur. Since the specimen had transverse beams, the observation of cracks could only be focused on the end surface of the transverse beams. Cracks were first observed during the 1.0% cycle. Fig. 14(d) shows the crack pattern observed at the transverse beam end of the + SRC-XH-TB specimen at Ppeak . Cracks first developed along the web and flanges of the cross-sectional steel shape, and then extended towards the corners of the beam. The Pt of the SRC-XH-TB specimen (644 kN) was 10% higher than the Pt of SRC-XH (588 kN). The transverse beams made an evident contribution to the joint shear strength. The use of corner ties in the

C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

647

where d = beam depth, and tf = beam flange thickness. The shear force Vb transferred from the SRC beams to the joint, such as in the cases of the SRC-XH, SRC-XH-TB and SRC-H specimens, can be obtained via flexural analysis of the SRC beam section under Mb . The BIAX program [10] was used to carry out the analysis and Vb is taken as the integration of the tensile stresses (or compressive stresses) in the section. Referring to Fig. 16, the joint shear strength Vt , under the occurrence of Pt , is equal to
Vt = 2Vb Pt .

(4)

4. Shear strength evaluation

(a) Joint zone for SRC-H.

The force transfer mechanism in the SRC beamcolumn joints is rather complex. As a result, the most commonly used and convenient shear strength evaluation method for the beamcolumn joint is the strength superposition method. Namely, the shear strength contributed by the cross-sectional steel shape and RC are first calculated separately, then the two strengths are superposed to obtain the SRC beamcolumn joint strength. The applicability and the accuracy of the superposition method are assessed here against the test results. 4.1. Shear strength contribution of the cross-sectional steel shape 4.1.1. Wide flange cross-sectional steel shapes For columns with a wide flange cross-sectional steel shape, the shear strength of the beamcolumn joint along the plane of the web is primarily provided by the web itself. According to AISCLRFD specifications [9], the shear strength provided by the web Vsw is:
Vsw = 0.6Fyw dc tw

(b) Suggested joint zone for SRC-H-SB. Fig. 15. Definition of joint zone.

(5)

where Fyw = yield stress of the column web, d c = column depth, and tw =column web thickness. If adequate connection ductility is provided, additional inelastic shear strength, which is contributed by transverse flanges and strain hardening of the web, can be developed [11]. Then, the shear strength Vsw can be obtained by Eq. (6) [9].
Vsw = 0.6Fyw dc tw 1 +
2 3bcf tcf

db dc tw

(6)

where bcf = width of the column flange, tcf = thickness of the column flange, and db = steel beam depth. 4.1.2. XH shapes There are no shear strength calculation methods provided by design specifications when an XH cross-sectional steel shape is used for the column. The shear strength contribution by the longitudinal web and transverse flanges can be calculated according to Eq. (5) or (6). The contribution of the longitudinal flanges is discussed here. Fig. 17 illustrates the load versus shear strain hysteresis loops of the longitudinal web and the longitudinal flange of S-XH up to the first 0.5% drift angle cycle with a maximum positive load of +72.4 kN. Both the longitudinal web and the longitudinal flange are basically in their elastic range. The measured shear strain on the longitudinal web (Fig. 8(a)) Wm was 0.00236 rad. and the measured shear strain on the longitudinal flange (Fig. 8(a)) Fm was 0.00054 rad. The corresponding shear stresses were Wm = 180 MPa and Fm = 41 MPa respectively. Fig. 18 shows the shear stress distribution of XH390 180 6 20 calculated according to elastic theory when the section was subjected to a shear force of 617 kN (at P = +72.4 kN). The calculated shear stress Wc at the position corresponding to Wm was 275 MPa. Similarly, the calculated shear stress Fc at the

Fig. 16. Forces in the joint zone.

joint did not introduce any negative behavior in the specimen. The test results provide positive evidence to support the applicability of the corner ties. 3.2. Beamcolumn joint shear strength Using Pt along with Eqs. (1) and (2), the corresponding Mb for each specimen can be obtained. According to AISC specifications [9], the shear force Vb transferred from each beam to the joint for the S-XH and SRC-H-SB specimens (note: both specimens used steel beams) is equal to
Vb = Mb d tf

(3)

648

C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

Fig. 17. Shear strain versus load P hysteresis loops of specimen S-XH in the elastic range.

Fig. 19. Displacement versus shear strain hysteresis loops of the longitudinal flange of specimen S-XH.

exceeded the yield stress. Accordingly, it is suggested that the shear strength provided by the two longitudinal flanges Vslf can be approximated by the yield strength of the two longitudinal flanges
Vslf = 2

2 3

0.6Fyf Af

(7)

The calculated shear strength Vs , which is defined as the sum of Vsw and Vslf , is 1905 kN. The Vt /Vs ratio (0.99) is very close to 1.0. The calculated shear strength matches the test results reasonably well. The Vstf , which is equal to 1089 kN, contributes 57% to the joint shear strength. The longitudinal flanges provide a significant portion of the joint strength.
(a) Flanges.

4.2. Shear strength contributed by RC A requirement of the ACI Code is that transverse hoops be provided within the beamcolumn joint. However, from test observations, the function of transverse hoops can be performed by a combination of the cross-sectional steel shape and corner ties without exhibiting any negative behavior. Therefore, the ACI specifications were deemed similar enough to be adopted to calculate the shear strength provided by the RC section. According to the ACI 318-05 code [12], the joint shear strength Vrc can be calculated by
Vrc =

(b) Longitudinal web. Fig. 18. Shear flow and shear stress distribution (units = MPa).

position corresponding to Fm was 8.7 MPa. The calculated flange stress Fc was only 21% of the measured flange stress Fm and the calculated web stress Wc was 153% of the measured stress Wm . The elastic theory significantly underestimates the shear stress on the longitudinal flange and overestimates the shear stress on the longitudinal web. This difference is mainly due to the existence of the diaphragm plates. The diaphragm plates provided not only a constraint to the section deformation but also additional paths to transfer shear force to the longitudinal flanges. The elastic theory does not take these effects into account, thus, it significantly underestimates the contribution of the longitudinal flange. Fig. 19 illustrates the drift angle versus shear strain hysteresis loops of the longitudinal flange of S-XH up to the first loop of the 3% drift angle. In the first half of the 3% drift angle loop, the shear stress reached yield stress when the drift angle reached 2.13%. + Furthermore, at Ppeak , the maximum shear strain of the longitudinal flange reached 108% of the yield strain. The measured strain data indicates that the maximum shear stress in the longitudinal flange

fc Aj

(8)

where = 1.67 for joints confined on all four faces, = 1.25 for joints confined on three faces or on two opposite faces, = 1.00 for all other types of joints, fc = concrete compressive strength (MPa), Aj = the effective area of the joint = joint depth h effective joint width bj . It is noted that a beam that frames into a face is considered to provide confinement to the joint if at least three-quarters of the face of the joint is covered by the beam [12]. Additionally, the effective joint width bj for a concentric joint should satisfy Eqs. (9a) and (9b).
bj bj b+h w

(9a) (9b)

C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

649

where b is the width of the beam, h is the depth of the column, and w is the width of the column. Table 4 gives the quantities of the parameters for the calculation of Vrc . The width of the SRC beams was 400 mm. This is more than three-quarters of the face of the joint, therefore = 1.25 is used for SRC-XH and SRC-H and = 1.67 is used for SRC-XH-TB. Steel beams, which could provide very little confinement to the joint, were used for SRC-H-SB. Consequently, it is suggested that these types of joints be classified as other types of joints, and, = 1.00 be used. According to the modified definition of the joint zone for SRC-H-SB, the joint depth h is taken to be equal to the depth of the column cross-sectional steel shape ds . 4.3. Shear strength prediction of SRC joints Using the strength superposition method and Vsw to represent the strength of the longitudinal web and the longitudinal flanges, the shear strength of the SRC beamcolumn joint Vtotal is
Vtotal = Vsw + Vslf + Vrc .

superposition is able to estimate the SRC beamcolumn joint shear strength with reasonable accuracy. The ratio of the tested shear strength over the predicted shear strength ranges from 1.13 to 1.24. 3. The measured shear strain on the longitudinal flanges of the cross-H section in the joint was much higher than was expected. The maximum shear stress on the flange can be higher than the yield stress. Consequently, the longitudinal flanges contribute significantly to the SRC beamcolumn joint shear strength. 4. Based on the observed crack pattern, the joint zone of the SRC column-wide flange beam system should be defined as the area enclosed by the steel column flanges and the continuity plates. With this definition, the calculated shear strength matched the tested shear strength well. 5. The combination of using the corner ties and the cross-sectional steel shape was able to replace the use of joint hoops with no negative behavior exhibited. The test results provide positive evidence for the applicability of the corner ties. Acknowledgment The research study described herein was sponsored by the National Science Council of the Republic of China under project NSC 93-2211-E-011-020. The authors would like to express their gratitude for the financial support received. References
[1] ACI-ASCE Committee 352. Recommendations for design of beamcolumn joints in monolithic reinforced concrete structures. ACI Journal Proceedings 1985; 82 (3): 26683. [2] Wakabayashi M. Design of earthquake-resistant buildings. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1986. [3] Wakabayashi M, Minami K. Developments in composite and mixed construction: Recent experimental studies on the hysteretic characteristics of beamto-column connections in composite structures. In: Kato B, Lu LW, editors. Proceedings of the U.S.A.-Japan seminar on composite structures and mixed structural systems. Lehigh University: Fritz Engineering Laboratory; 1980. p. 21726. [4] Teraoka M, Morita K, Sasaki S, Katsura D. Experimental study on simplified steel reinforced concrete beamcolumn joints in construction technology. Steel & Composite Structures 2001;1(3):295312. [5] Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ). AIJ standards for structural calculation of steel reinforced concrete structures. Tokyo; 2001 [in Japanese]. [6] Construction Magazine. Steel reinforced concrete structure design code requirements and notes. Taiwan (Taipei); 2004 [in Chinese]. [7] Leon RT. Shear strength and hysteretic behavior of interior beamcolumn joints. ACI Structural Journal 1990;87(1):311. [8] Durrani AJ, Wight JK. Behavior of interior beam-to-column connections under earthquake-type loading. ACI Journal Proceedings 1985;82(3):3439. [9] American Institute of Steel Construction. Specification for structural steel buildings. Chicago (IL): AISC Inc.; 2005. [10] Wallace JW. BIAX: revision 1A computer program for the analysis of reinforced concrete and reinforced masonry sections. In: Report no. CU/Cee-92/4. Potsdam (New York): Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Clarkson University; 1992. [11] Krawinkler H. Shear in beamcolumn joints in seismic design of steel frames. Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) 1978; 15(3):8291. [12] ACI Committee 318. Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-05) and commentary (ACI 318R-05). Farmington Hills (MI): American Concrete Institute; 2005.

(10)

The calculated Vtotal and Vt /Vtotal are listed in Table 4. The values of Vt /Vtotal range from 1.13 to 1.24 with an average value of 1.19. Eq. (10) underestimates the joint strength by 13%24%. The underestimation can be expected since the composite effect between cross-sectional steel shape and concrete was neglected. The use of Vsw would possibly introduce too much plastification near the plastic hinge region and is considered harmful to the plastic hinge rotation capacity of the beam-to-column connection. Therefore, for design purposes, it is suggested that Vsw in Eq. (10) be replaced by Vsw . The joint shear strength Vsrc then becomes
Vsrc = Vsw + Vslf + Vrc .

(11)

The calculated values of Vsrc and Vt /Vsrc are also listed in Table 4. The values of Vt /Vsrc range from 1.25 to 1.32 with an average value of 1.28. Since the number of test specimens is quite limited, it seems that Vsrc provides a more reasonable margin of safety than Vtotal . Therefore, in design, use of Vsrc and Eq. (11) are suggested for the calculation of the nominal joint shear strength. 5. Conclusion Five large-scale cruciform type beamcolumn subassemblies were tested under cyclic loading to investigate the shear behavior and shear strength of SRC beamcolumn joints. The applicability and accuracy of the strength superposition method for the estimation of joint shear strength is assessed against test data. Based on the experimental and analytical results reported herein, the following conclusions are drawn: 1. The crack pattern of the SRC beamcolumn joint is similar to that of the RC beamcolumn joints. However, the load versus joint shear deformation hysteresis loops of the SRC joints are more saturated than those of the RC joints. As a result, the SRC joint dissipates relatively more energy. 2. Although the composite effect between cross-sectional steel shape and concrete is ignored, the method of strength