Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CFT Column Base Design and Practice in Japan
CFT Column Base Design and Practice in Japan
Reserch Associate, Faculty of Human-Environment Studies, Kyushu University, Japan, e-mail: hitaka@arch.kyushu-u.ac.jp
Associate Professor, Div. of Earthquake Disaster Prevention, Disaster Prevention Researvh Institute, KyotoUniversity, Japan,
e-mail: suita@archi.kyoto-u.ac.jp
3
Engineer, Nikken Sekkei Co., Japan, e-mail: katoum@nikken.co.jp
2
281
Behavior of the steel column bases was actively studied after the 1978 earthquakes. The findings still are the
basis of the current design methods to this day. In response to Kobe earthquake, design method for the base plate
connection was reviewed. The results were presented in the publication from Building Center of Japan in 2001.
Recent studies on CFT column bases are to develop better column base designs, rather than to grasp the behavior
of traditional column bases. Ideas of several such studies are, for example, to develop column bases that are
physically very close to a pin, damage-control type, or Semi-Embedded type.
In the following, the second chapter introduces a brief history of steel base plate connection design. Damaged
steel column bases found after Kobe earthquake are also shown. The structural design is reviewed by building
officers of the city/prefecture government in Japan. Engineers commonly design buildings using procedures
recommended by Building Center of Japan (this procedure is called BCJ design procedure hereafter). The third
chapter describes the current BCJ design procedure of the base plate and the embedded column connection, and
compare the two connections from construction and other aspects. The last chapter introduces two recent
experimental researches on CFT column bases in Japan.
Non-Shrinkage
Mortar
Reinforcing Bar
Base Plate
Base Plate
Base Plate
Hoop
Anchor Bolt
Base Beam
Base Beam
Base Beam
Anchor Bolt
Base Beam
Anchor Bolt
column base design became an issue for the first time. Many researchers were motivated to study behavior of the
steel column bases, and its effect on the overall building behavior. The damages proved that the rigidity of the
actual base plate connections is not to be relied on. The smaller rigidity of the column base meant larger strength
demand for the second floor beams.
After 1981, Pre-Kobe Earthquake
Reflecting the observations of the damages, the new seismic design standard was endorsed in 1981. However,
the column base design practice itself remained the same as before. Rather, it was the story drift limit endorsed
in the new standard that drew designers attention to the column base design. In the new standard, the story drift
angle of a building under design seismic force should not be more than 1/200 rad. Whether the column base is
modeled as a pin or rigid end now mattered. The reports of the damaged base plate connections generated the
view that the performance of such connections is no better than pins. The legislation announced that only the
column bases with embedded length of more than 30 cm were to be regarded as rigidly connected to the ground.
The base plate connections were thus modeled as pins after the incident. The encased base plate connections and
the embedded column connections were invented because of this change. The embedded column connections
were mostly used for large-scale buildings, and base plate connections, for mid-to-small buildings.
In the meantime, some companies developed base plate connection packages for wide flange shape and tubular
members used for building frames. Combinations of cast-steel base plate, anchor bolts and washers were sold
with a design manual. The performance (i.e. rotational stiffness, strength and ductility) of such connections is
pre-qualified by the authority. Non-commercial base plate connections, thus regarded as pin connection, were
designed to resist only to shear and tension.
Steel Column Bases Damaged during Kobe Earthquake
Some details of column base damages found in 426 steel buildings are
reported in Reconnaissance (AIJ, 1995) after Kobe earthquake. The
damaged buildings were mostly low-rise. Eighty-two percent of these
buildings had less than 6 stories (CFT was still quite new structural
member at this time. Hence no CFT buildings damaged in Kobe).
Base plate connection was found in 63% of the 426 buildings.
Sixty-seven percent of the unbraced frames with base plate
connections (112 buildings) collapsed or were severely damaged. In
almost all the damaged base plate connections, anchor bolts had
fractured or elongated severely. Other forms of damage were also
found in a few cases (e.g. large plastification of base plate in 6
buildings, fracture at welds between the column and the base plate in
Figure 2 Damaged Base Plate
4 buildings). Twenty-six percent of unbraced frames and 29% of
braced frames were damaged in the column base. No damages in the embedded column connections were
reported. Figure 2 shows an example of a damaged base plate connection. The column of this four-story building
is a 200x200 wide flange shape member. The damaged connections were mostly such small base plate
connections that had been modeled as pins.
Post-Kobe Steel Column Base Design
Reflecting the damages observed after the event, efforts were made to investigate proper seismic design force
into the base plate connection. The results were reflected in BCJ design procedure (explained in the next
chapter). The procedure for the embedded column design remained unchanged. In the new procedure, strength
demand for the base plate connection is estimated considering the rotational stiffness of the connection. Another
major change is the introduction of a design method relying on ductility of the anchor bolts. Engineers, however,
are still careful in using this method.
CURRENT STEEL COLUMN BASE DESIGN IN JAPAN
Background Researches
Most of the findings about steel column bases, i.e. the rotational stiffness, yield and ultimate strength, types of
damages, histeresis, were made in late 1970s and 1980s. The rotational stiffness of the connection varies
283
depending on the construction detail or quality. The currently used equation for stiffness (the equation (1) in the
next section) tends to underestimate the stiffness, especially in the case where specimens are not loaded axially.
The ultimate strength of the steel column base connections is well predicted using the current design formula
(the equation (2) in the next section). Figure 3 compares the calculated strength and test results of the
connections (AIJ, 2001). The horizontal axis is the axial load ratio for the base plate connection (Left), and the
embedded column length for the embedded column connection (Right). In Fig. 3b, it is observed safe to expect
hinging of the column at the base if more than twice the column depth of the lower end of the column is
embedded.
Column
Base plate
Mortar
Anchor bolt
Base Concrete
Hoop
Anchor Beam
earthquake are 1) estimation of design moments for the frames and the column bases considering the rotational
stiffness of the base plate connection, and 2) different design approaches depending on ductility of the anchor
bolts. If ductile anchor bolts are to be used, yielding is allowed for the column base (anchor bolts) under large
earthquakes. Yielding of base plates is not favored.
Rotational Stiffness and Design Moment of the Base Plate Connection
The rotational stiffness of a base plate connection, K BS , is calculated by the following equation (1).
K BS =
E nt Ab (d t + d c )
2lb
(1)
E : Youngs modulus, nt : number of bolts on the tension side, Ab : anchor bolts section area, lb : embedded
length of the anchor bolt. Other geometric notations are defined in Fig. 7. This equation gives a conservative
estimation of the stiffness. A linear analysis considering this rotational stiffness gives larger moments for the
first story columns and the second story floor beams. In the case of a base plate connection with configuration as
shown in Figure 8, the distance between the flexural point of the first story column and the ground level
generally is 0.4 to 0.45 times story height. This value is not much affected by the detail of the connection (e.g.
anchor bolt location, stiffeners around the column end). In most cases, it is only for the second floor beam
sections that larger section is required if the rigidity of the column base is reduced (Hasegawa, 2000).
Strength of Column Base and Anchor Bolts Ductility
Figure 6 schematically shows the column base
design procedure for regular buildings of more than
certain volume. In Japan, designing of such a
building is a two-step procedure. First, the design
moment, axial and shear forces for each member
are obtained by linear static analysis considering
the rotational stiffness of the column base, K BS .
The base plate connection design is determined at
the second step. Depending on the ductility of the
used anchor bolts, the ultimate or yield strength of
the connection is compared with either (=1.3)
times the plastic strength of the column (Mpc) or
the force that exist in the column base when the
building is resisting with its full capacity (Mla).
Mla is obtained by multiplying the forces due to
the earthquake load in the connection by (=2).
The value for , 2, was determined because the
ultimate base shear of steel frames is usually about
twice the design seismic load.
A ductile anchor bolt is defined by the yield ratio
of the steel. The yield ratio of a ductile anchor bolt
is no more than 0.75 (0.65 for some special anchor
bolts). These values are determined so that the yield
strength of the anchor bolts shank exceeds the
ultimate strength of its thread section. The base
plate connections with such anchor bolts possess
the plastic rotational capacity of more than 0.03
rad.
2nd Step
If Ductile
Anchor
Bolts Used
No
Yes
Yes
If M M
u
pc
No
M u M la
M y M la
G
Figure 6
In the case of using ductile anchor bolts, the ultimate strength of the base plate connection, M u may be used.
M u is estimated assuming stress distribution as shown in Figure 7. The compression strength of the concrete is
0.85 times its mix strength. M u is calculated by the equation (2),
285
( N u N ) d t
(N + Tu ) D 1 N + Tu
M u = Tu d t +
2
Nu
( N + 2T ) d
u
t
(N u N > N u Tu )
(N u Tu N > Tu )
(2)
( Tu N 2Tu )
where N : axial force in the connection, N u : maximum compression strength of base concrete under the base
plate ( = 0.85 BDFc ), Tu : maximum tensile strength of anchor bolts on the tension side, Fc : mix strength of
dc
In Concrete
Figure 7
90
P
tb
la
Figure 8
db
D=B=14in.(356mm)
de=1.5in.(35mm)
tbB.P.thickness
laEmbedded length
dbDiameter of A. Bolt
60
JP
ASD
LRFD
B.P.
Thickness
30
A. Bolt
Diameter
JP
ASD
LRFD
3
M/(0.5DP)
(=267kN) and varying moment, M. The design results for the required base plate thickness and anchor bolt
diameter are compared in Figure 8. The horizontal axis of the graph is the moment divided by P and half the
depth of the column section. Despite the difference of material strength used in the calculation in the US and
Japan as shown in Table 1, the results are similar. Ductility of anchor bolts does not affect the result unless the
design sequence A in Figure 6 is taken.
Table 1 Material Strength Used for Design
Stress
Elements
Anchor Bolt
Base Plate
Concrete
J apan
1st Step
2nd Step
Fy
2Fc/3
Fc
US
ASD
LRFD
0.33Fu
0.56Fu
0.75Fy
0.9Fy
0.350.7Fc 0.511.7Fc
Fy and Fu: nominal yield and tensile strength of steel, respectively, Fc: mix strength of concrete
Embedded Column Connection
Figure 1c shows a typical configuration of the embedded column connection. The embedded column length is
determined such that the moment and shear will be resisted by the bearing of concrete on the embedded column.
In the case of steel tubular column, about twice the column depth is generally sufficient for the embedded
column length. Filling concrete in the steel tube embedded in the concrete has been one of the solutions to avoid
kink near the concrete surface since early days. The problem in the embedded column design arises if the column
is located at the fringe of the building and the base concrete cannot be extended outward.
Larger rotational stiffness is expected for the embedded column base than the base plate connection. In the
linear analysis, the rigid point of the column is assumed to be 1.5 times column depth below the concrete.
Other Issues
In using the base plate connections, engineers have two options, i.e. to use commercial connections or to design
and fabricate the connections using ordinary material. Though expensive, the commercial connections possess
reliable rigidity and large rotational ductility. If the base plate connections are to be fabricated, the engineers
estimate the stiffness using the equation (1). Although not readily available yet, the ductile anchor bolts were
specified in the Japanese Industrial Standard in 2002. The circulation of such anchor bolts will increase, and so
will the fabricated ductile base plate connections in future.
In terms of construction, the embedded column connection is not too desirable. In the case of employing this
connection, steel members must be erected before the base concrete casting. This requires that preparation and
fabrication of steel members and selection of the construction workers should all be finished before casting the
base concrete. One major attraction of using steel system is that its construction period is shorter. Replacing the
embedded column connection with the commercial base plate connections, despite the expense, is sometimes a
reasonable solution.
It is a difficult task to place anchor bolts correctly to match the column location. The poured concrete some times
washes the anchor bolts away from its original position.
If large stress is expected in the connection (e.g. braced columns) complete joint penetration groove weld is used
between the steel column and the base plate. Fillet welding is used if the strength is sufficient to resist design
force.
As to possible problems in using CFT instead of steel columns, more reinforcement is needed in the base
concrete beam because the column has larger strength than steel columns. Likewise, the required embedded
column length is larger for the CFT columns.
SEMI-EMBEDDED COLUMN CONNECTION TEST
(This research is a work of Morino, et. al. (2003))
Objective: Studying the behavior of Semi-embedded CFT Column Base. According to studies on the embedded
column bases, the embedded column length is determined by the moment generated by the bearing of the
287
concrete, which is roughly two times the depth of the column section (2D). Semi-embedded CFT Column Base
consists of a CFT column embedded over the length shorter than 2D in the base concrete, a base plate and anchor
bolt. A concrete pocket similar to those required for shear lags is required. But it is not necessary for the column
to be placed before the base concrete casting, thus the construction is similar to that for the base plate connection.
The construction procedure of the semi-embedded column base is schematically illustrated in Figure 9. Firstly,
concrete is cast for the foundation beam with anchor bolts arranged, leaving a void area for the steel erection.
Then, the steel is erected, and finally the concrete is post-cast into the pocket beneath the column base. In this
manner, a mixed construction of steel and concrete is avoided.
Specimens and other details: a total of eight specimens were tested under horizontal load at the column top.
Table 2 summarizes the test specimens. The first alphabet indicates monotonic or recursive loading. The
numerals e.g. 22 indicate width-thickness ratio of the column tube. The last alphabet in the designation of the
specimen signifies F: full, H: half, Q: quarter, Z: zero length of the required embedded length for the embedded
column connection by AIJ (2001). No axial loading. The base plate is thick enough not to yield due to tension in
the anchor bolts. The base plate is fillet welded around the steel tube. Anchor bolts are designed for two
specimens (Z and Q) such that the ultimate moment resisted by concrete baring and the anchor bolts will be
equal to the yield strength of the CFT column. Anchor bolts are tied together by so-called anchor beams near
the bottom.
Table 2
Dimensions Related to Test Parameter
Specimen
Figure 10 Specimen
Figure 11
288
Test Setup
Architectural Institute of Japan (1995), Reconnaissance report on damage to steel building structures.
Architectural Institute of Japan (2001), Recommendations for Design of Connections in Steel Structures. (in
Japanese)
Building Center of Japan (2001), Commentary on structural design standard and techniques. (in Japanese)
Hasegawa, T. (2000), Seismic response behavior of steel rigid frames having exposed-type column base,
Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 46B, 657-665. (in Japanese)
Kawano, A. (1998), On the effect of restoring force characteristics of column-base on inelastic response
behavior of weak-beam steel frame under earthquake ground motion, Journal of Stract. Constr. Eng., AIJ,
Vol. 507, 139-146. (in Japanese)
Morino, S., Kawaguchi, J., Tsuji, A., and Kadoya, H. (2003), Strength and stiffness of CFT semi-embedded
type column base, Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Structure, Sydney, Australia,
June 2003, 3-14.
Yamada, T. and Akiyama, H. (1997), Influence of the rigidity of column bases on the ultimate earthquake
resistance of multi-story steel moment frames, Journal of Stract. Constr. Eng., AIJ, Vol. 496, 113-118. (in
Japanese)
290