Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Seismic Rehabilitation of Beam Column Joint Using GFRP Sheets - 2002 - Engineering Structures PDF
Seismic Rehabilitation of Beam Column Joint Using GFRP Sheets - 2002 - Engineering Structures PDF
www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct
Received 13 July 2001; received in revised form 24 September 2001; accepted 24 May 2002
Abstract
Techniques for upgrading reinforced concrete beamcolumn joints are proposed. The test specimens represent a typical joint that
was built in accordance to pre-1970s codes. The objective of the rehabilitation is to upgrade the shear strength of these joints and
reduce the potential for bond-slip of the bottom bars of the beam. Glass fibre-reinforced polymer (GFRP) sheets are wrapped around
the joint to prevent the joint shear failure. GFRP sheets are attached to the bottom beam face to replace the inadequately anchored
steel bars. Three beamcolumn joints are tested; namely, a control specimen and two rehabilitated specimens. The specimens are
tested under quasi-static load to failure. The control specimen showed combined brittle joint shear and bond failure modes while
the rehabilitated specimens showed a more ductile failure mode. A simple design methodology for the rehabilitation scheme is
proposed. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Beam-column joints; Seismic rehabilitation; Joint shear strength; Bond-slip; Ductility; GFRP composites; Design
0141-0296/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 1 - 0 2 9 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 8 1 - 0
1398 T. El-Amoury, A. Ghobarah / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 13971407
Fig. 1. Exterior joint failure during the 1999 Kocaeli (Turkey) earthquake.
joint was rehabilitated and tested [3]. Steel plates were shear failure of the beamcolumn joint was eliminated
anchored to the beam bottom face at each side of the and instead ductile flexural hinging of the beam
joint and connected together using threaded steel rods occurred. The joints tested in this research programme
driven through the column. The idea is to replace the were designed with deficient shear strength but with
inadequately anchored steel bars with equivalent steel adequate positive reinforcement anchoring in the joint.
plates. Steel-plate jacketing was used to enhance the In other words, bond-slip failure was not included in the
joint shear strength. Test results showed that joint jacket- rehabilitation scheme.
ing was ineffective in improving the joint shear strength Limited testing was conducted on beamcolumn joints
due to slippage of the steel plates. The specimen reached rehabilitated using composite rods to strengthen the col-
a drift of 4% without significant deterioration in strength. umn flexural strength and fibre wrap to strengthen the
Flat steel plates were used to confine the joint in an joint shear [9]. Joint rehabilitation using fibre-reinforced
attempt to prevent the spalling of concrete and to main- polymers (FRP) has the advantages of simplicity of
tain the concrete integrity [4,5]. Steel channels were application and less need for skilled labour. The econ-
attached to the beam bottom face to prevent slip of the omic advantages of FRP rehabilitation were evaluated
bars. This scheme was found to be efficient in preventing by Ehlen and Marshall [10].
the bars slippage, increasing the joint shear strength and So far, most of the research conducted on beam
reducing the rate of strength deterioration. column joints has mainly been concerned with upgrading
Ghobarah et al. [6] used corrugated steel-sheet jacket- joint shear strength using steel plates, sheets and sections
ing for joint confinement, leaving a gap between the con- and FRP. However, the rehabilitation of bond-slip in
crete and the jacket to be filled with grout. The shear reinforced concrete beamcolumn joints has not received
strength of the rehabilitated joints was increased and the much attention.
failure mode became flexural hinging in the beam. The objective of the present research programme is to
Carbon fibre-reinforced polymer (CFRP) materials develop new rehabilitation systems for strengthening the
were used to strengthen an external beamcolumn joint shear resistance of beamcolumn joints and for upgrad-
in shear [7]. The retrofitted specimen was wrapped with ing resistance to bond-slip of the positive reinforcement
multiple layers of CFRP sheets. The joint shear capacity anchored in the joint.
was increased by 25% and the specimens reached 5%
drift.
Ghobarah and Said [8] investigated the rehabilitation 2. Experimental programme
of beamcolumn joints using glass fibre-reinforced poly-
mers (GFRP). One joint was tested as control specimen 2.1. Test specimens
and two were tested after rehabilitation. The proposed
rehabilitation scheme was to wrap the joint with U- Three reinforced concrete beamcolumn joints were
shaped GFRP sheets. The ends of the composite sheets tested: T0, TR1 and TR2. The specimens represent an
were tied together using two steel plates and four steel exterior joint in a typical concrete frame that has been
tie rods through the joint. The behaviour of the rehabili- built before 1970 [11]. Exterior joints are selected
tated specimen was significantly improved. The brittle because they are more vulnerable and are normally
T. El-Amoury, A. Ghobarah / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 13971407 1399
expected to fail first. If the rehabilitation system is suc- 45 directions. The properties of the fibre sheets used
cessful, it can be easily adapted to interior joints as well. in the current testing programme, as supplied by the
The beamcolumn joints are designed assuming that manufacturer, are given in Table 1.
points of contra-flexure occur at the mid-height of col-
umns and the mid-span of beams. The top longitudinal 2.2. Test set-up and instrumentation
reinforcements in the beam are bent down into the col-
umn, whereas the bottom reinforcement was anchored The specimens were tested in the column vertical pos-
150 mm from the column face. No transverse reinforce- ition, hinged at the top and bottom column ends and sub-
ment was installed in the joint region. The beam was jected to a cyclic load applied at the beam tip as shown
reinforced using 4#20 as top and bottom longitudinal in Fig. 3. The beam-tip displacement and the column
bars and #10 as transverse steel. The column was lateral displacement were measured using poten-
reinforced with 6#20 plus 2#15 as longitudinal bars and tiometers. Two diagonal linear voltage differential trans-
#10 ties spaced 200 mm. The dimensions and reinforce- formers (LVDTs) were attached to the joint to measure
ment details of all of the specimens are identical, as the joint shear deformation. The displacement of the col-
shown in Fig. 2. umn above and below the joint was measured using two
After testing the control specimen, T0, the cracked additional LVDTs attached to the top and bottom of the
concrete was removed from the joint region and the beam, as shown in Fig. 3. Twelve strain gauges were
adjacent parts of the columns and beam. The specimen installed on the reinforcement steel bars to measure the
was laid inside the wooden forms again and new con- strains at different loading levels, as shown in Fig. 4.
crete was poured to replace the removed materials. The For the retrofitted specimens, 10 strain gauges were
specimen was then rehabilitated and tested again as installed on the fibre sheets, two strain gauges were
specimen TR1. However, specimen T2 is an original installed on the tie rods driven through the joint.
specimen that was retrofitted then tested. The concrete A reversed quasi-static cyclic load was applied at the
compressive strength on the test day was 30.6, 43.5 and beam tip using a hydraulic actuator of 250 mm stroke.
39.5 MPa for the control specimen T0, the repair con- The applied load was measured using a load cell. The
crete of specimen TR1 and for specimen TR2, respect- loading routine consisted of two phases as shown in Fig.
ively. The yield strength of the steel bars #10, #15 and 5. The first phase was load control, where the specimen
#20 was 450, 408 and 425 MPa, respectively. was subjected to an increasing load up to the first yield
Bi-directional GFRP material were used in the joint of the steel bars. This phase of loading was used to deter-
rehabilitation. The bi-directional material is woven in the mine the displacement of the beam tip when first yield
Table 1
Properties of the composite materials
GFRP Tensile strength in 0 direction (MPa) Elongation at break (%) Tensile modulus (GPa) Thickness (mm)
TR2, eight unidirectional glass fibre sheets were applied 3.1. Specimen T0
to the bottom beam face and provided with two U-
shaped 3 mm thick steel plates to enhance the bond In the first loading cycle, the specimen was loaded up
between the GFRP and the concrete, as shown in Fig. to 3.0 kN up and down to test the instrumentations. The
6b. Using the described configuration, the resultant of first beam crack was observed during the second cycle
the tensile forces developed in the composite sheets may at the column face at load of 7.7 kN up. In the fourth
cause debonding of the sheets from the concrete surface cycle, a load of 30.0 kN was applied up and down to the
at the beamcolumn corner. To overcome this potential specimen; new flexural and flexuralshear cracks formed
problem, a steel angle was installed at the lower beam along the beam length. In the sixth cycle, vertical cracks
column corner as shown in Fig. 6a. To install the angle formed in the joint region at beam-tip load of 35.5 kN
in place, the beam bottom bars were exposed for a dis- due to bond-slip of the beam bottom bars. During the
tance of 150 mm from the column face and the heads eighth cycle, diagonal shear cracks developed in the joint
of A375 steel bolts of diameter 20 mm were welded to region, and the specimen reached a load of 60.0 kN at
the beam bars in two rows. For specimen TR1, four 28 a beam-tip displacement of 20 mm. Repeating the same
mm diameter and 170 mm depth holes were drilled in cycle, the beam reached the same displacement but at
the column in two rows. The steel angle was fixed in lower load level and the beam bars started to slip out of
place using washers and nuts to the bolts welded to the the joint with an associated reduction in the developed
beam reinforcement and using Hilti HVA 5/86-5/8 strain in the bars. The beam-tip displacement of 20 mm
adhesive anchors to the column. For specimen TR2, four was used as a reference value for the displacement-con-
25 mm diameter external threaded rods with trolled loading phase. In the following cycles the beam
500 mm 200 mm 25 mm steel plate were used to tie tip was displaced up and down by multiples of this value.
the angle to the column as shown in Fig. 6b. The reason for selecting this arbitrary displacement as
reference displacement in the test is that yield of the
reinforcement steel is not expected to occur. When the
specimen was pushed up, the bond-slip cracks opened
and the lateral load-carrying capacity deteriorated sig-
3. Experimental results
nificantly; however, when it was pulled down, the diag-
onal shear cracks opened. This caused disintegration of
In this section, the behaviour of the control and the concrete, deterioration of the bond condition of the
rehabilitated specimens is described and the effective- beam top bars and degradation of the lateral load-carry-
ness of the rehabilitation schemes is evaluated. ing capacity. The specimen reached a maximum load of
1402 T. El-Amoury, A. Ghobarah / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 13971407
In the particular case of joint T0, Eq. (1) gives the ten-
Fig. 15. Degradation of stiffness with storey drift.
sion force in the steel bars to be Ts 600 kN, and Eq.
(2) gives the depth of the concrete block to be a
reinforcement or the inadequately anchored steel 61.0 mm. The resisting moment capacity given by Eq.
reinforcement. (3) is Mr 187.32 kN m.
strain in the fibre efrp 0.0189 with the number of (11) gives Vc 276.06 kN. From Eq. (10), the required
GFRP layers, nfrp, as 4.35. shear resistance contributed by the fibre is Vfrp
In specimen TR1, the number of GFRP layers, nfrp, is 258.21 kN.
taken as 4, while in specimen TR2 the nfrp is taken as 8. The shear strength provided using one bi-directional
and one unidirectional layers can be estimated from Eq.
5.2. Joint shear strengthening (12), by assuming that both sheets will reach the same
strain level of 1.0%, which is equal to 2/3 of the smallest
The developed joint shear force is calculated as maximum strains of the two composite sheet types. This
[12,13]: gives the provided shear resistance by the FRP, Vr
290.35 kN, which is greater than the required fibre
Vj 1.25AsfyVcol, (9)
resistance Vfrp.
where
reached the proposed strength due to the contribution [4] Beres A, White RN, Gergely P. Seismic performance of interior
of the existing steel bars, which was ignored in the and exterior beam-to-column reinforced concrete frame buildings.
Detailed experimental results. In: Report No. 92-06. Ithaca, NY:
design. Department of Structural Engineering, Cornell University, 1992.
In specimen TR2, use of U-shaped steel plates to [5] Beres A, El-Borgi S, White RN, Gergely P. Experimental results
restrain the GFRP eliminated debonding of the GFRP of repaired and retrofitted beamcolumn joint tests in lightly
from the concrete surface. The FRP reached a strain reinforced concrete frame buildings. In: Report No, NCEER-92-
that is approximately 1/3 of its ultimate strain in both 25. Buffalo (NY): National Center for Earthquake Engineering
Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1992.
tension and compression without failure. The rehabili- [6] Ghobarah A, Aziz TS, Biddah A. Seismic rehabilitation of
tated joint achieved 52% higher load-carrying reinforced concrete beamcolumn connections. Earthquake Spec-
capacity and dissipated six times the energy dissipated tra 1996;12(4):76180.
by the control specimen. [7] Pantelides C, Clyde C, Dreaveley L. Rehabilitation of R/C build-
ing joints with FRP composites. Proceedings of the 12th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Zealand Society for
Earthquake Engineering, Silverstream, Upper Hutt, New Zealand,
Acknowledgements 2000. Paper no. 2306.
[8] Ghobarah A, Said A. Seismic rehabilitation of beamcolumn
The authors are grateful to Fyfe Co. and R.J. Watson, joints using FRP laminates. J. Earthquake Eng. 2001;5(1):113
29.
Inc. for providing the GFRP material used in the tests, [9] Prota A, Nanni A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E. Seismic upgrade of
and to ISIS Canada for supporting the research pro- beamcolumn joints with FRP reinforcement. In: FRPRCS5. Pro-
gramme. ceedings of 5th Non-Metallic Reinforcement for Concrete Struc-
tures, Thomas Telford Ltd, UK. 2001. paper # 339.
[10] Ehlen MA, Marshall HE. The economics of new-technology
materials: a case study of FRP bridge decking. In: National Insti-
References tute of Standards and Technology Report NISTIR 5864. Gaithers-
burg (MD): Office of Applied Economics, Building and Fire
[1] Ghobarah A, Biddah A. Dynamic analysis of reinforced concrete Research Laboratory, 1996.
frames including joint shear deformation. Eng. Struct. [11] ACI-318 Building code requirements for reinforced concrete.
1999;21:97187. Detroit (MI): American Concrete Institute, 1963.
[2] Ghobarah A, Youssef, M. Response of an existing RC building [12] CSA A23.3 Design of concrete structures. Rexdale, Ontario: Can-
including concrete crushing and bond slip effects. In: Proceedings adian Standards Association, 1994.
of 8th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Canad- [13] Park R, Paulay T. Reinforced concrete structures. New York:
ian Association for Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, John Wiley & Sons, 1975.
1999. p. 42732. [14] ACI 352 Recommendation for design of beamcolumn joints in
[3] Estrada JI. Use of steel elements to strengthen a reinforced con- monolithic reinforced concrete structures. Detroit (MI): American
crete building. M.Sc. thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 1990. Concrete Institute, 1976.