Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

Investigation of through beam connection to concrete filled circular steel

tube (CFCST) column
M.M. Arabnejad Khanouki a,⁎, N.H. Ramli Sulong a,⁎, Mahdi Shariati a, M.M Tahir b
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
b
UTM Construction Research Centre, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Institute for Smart Infrastructure and Innovative Construction, UTM, 81310, Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Nonlinear finite element models of through beam connection to concrete filled circular steel tube (CFCST) col-
Received 13 May 2015 umn with three types of connection failures (column, beam and joint shear failures) under monotonic loading
Received in revised form 7 December 2015 were proposed by ABAQUS programme. The connection detail composed of a steel I-beam which is completely
Accepted 1 January 2016
passed through the circular steel tube column and welded to it by fillet or full penetration weld and the tube is
Available online 29 January 2016
then filled with concrete. The connection parameters investigated included different ratios of column-to-beam
Keywords:
flexural strength, fillet or full penetration weld to connect the beam to the tube, using rebar inside of the column
Concrete filled tube columns and effect of beam web and concrete core inside the joint. Buckling analysis, concrete damage, weld fractured and
Through beam connection tube tearing were defined in the model. Good agreement was achieved between the model and existing test re-
Finite element analysis sults in terms of the beam tip force–storey drift relationship, joint distortion and joint shear strain. As a result, the
Steel and concrete damage models could correctly predict the linear, nonlinear and post-failure behaviours of the connection. In addition,
Weld fractured other parameters of the connection were investigated for the specimens. Finally, the effect of column axial
Buckling analysis load level for the connection behaviour in the three types of failures was investigated as a parametric study.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Recently for prefabrication of the composite structures, short

Composite structure frames composed of concrete filled steel tube
columns and steel beams are increasingly used in the world. The behav-
iour of the frames under lateral loads is depending on strength, stiffness
and ductility of the moment connections between the columns and the
beams. Therefore the beam-to-column connection is a critical element
to transfer related forces from beam to the column. In addition, the con-
nection should have suitable detail for construction and fabrication
costs. Different types of welded beam-to-column connection details
were provided by many researchers. The details include through web
or flange of the beam with or without penetrated elements to the col-
umn [1,2], connection details with interior or exterior diaphragms
[3–5], internal diaphragms with horizontal plates to form tapered
beam flange [6], strengthen connection with anchored studs [3], com-
bined cross diaphragm and lower diaphragm [7], through beam connec-
tion detail [8], connection reinforced with T-shaped stiffeners [9–11],
and connection with flange plate [12].
⁎ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: arabnejad_mm@um.edu.my (M.M.A. Khanouki),
hafizah_ramli@um.edu.my (N.H. Ramli Sulong).
steel beam stubs are welded to the steel tube column in the factory.
Then the columns are installed at the site and the full beams are at-
tached to the columns by bolted connection. Finally, concrete is
pumped inside the tubes and on the floors to form a composite struc-
ture. One of the connection details that could satisfy the above con-
ditions is known as through beam connection. The connection
detail composed of a passed steel beam through the steel tube and
welded with fillet or full penetration weld and the tube is then filled
with concrete. Based on literature review, through beam connection
to concrete filled circular steel tube column is the ideal rigid connec-
tion [1,12–14]. Design of through beam connection is limited to a few
guidelines. A guideline for designing through steel beam connection
to reinforced concrete columns was proposed by the ASCE Task com-
mittee on design criteria for composite structures in steel and con-
crete [15]. Elremaily and Azizinamini proposed a guideline for
designing the through steel I beam connection to concrete filled cir-
cular steel tube columns [16].
In this study, finite element analysis of through beam connection to
concrete filled circular steel tube (CFCST) column was investigated
under monotonic loading. The main test parameters include different
column- to- beam flexural strength ratio, fillet or full penetration weld
to connect the beam to the tube wall, using rebar inside of the column

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.01.002
0143-974X/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 145

penetration weld and after that the tube is filled by concrete. The spec-
Nomenclature
imens were divided in three groups based on the type of failures as
following:
bf beam flange width
Group one (Column failure) included specimens NSF1 and NSF2. In
d total beam depth
these specimens, fillet weld was used to attach the beam to the tube
dp penetration measure
wall and the column was weaker than the beam such that the failure
Ec modulus of elasticity of the concrete core
took place in the column. In addition, specimen NSF2 had no concrete
Ecm modulus of elasticity of the concrete
inside the joint in order to investigate the effect of the concrete core in
Es modulus of elasticity of the steel
the joint. The results were the weld fractured and tearing of the tube
fbo biaxial concrete compressive strength
aligned the weld.
fco uniaxial concrete compressive strength
Group two (Beam failure) included specimens NSF4, NSF5 and
f'c cylinder concrete compressive strength
NSF8 in which the column was stronger than the beam such that
ft concrete tensile strength
the column to beam flexural strength ratio (r) were 1.7, 1.65 and
Fyb minimum specified yield stress of the steel beam
2.17, respectively. These ratios were bigger than 1.2, which is recom-
H distance between two reaction points (mid height) of
mended in the design of beam to column connections [17]. The weld
the column
between beam and the tube was full penetration for specimens NSF4
Kdflt default contact stiffness
and NSF5 while fillet weld was used for specimen NSF8. The only dif-
Ki stiffness for each segment
ference between specimens NSF4 and NSF5 was the use of four re-
i segment number
bars (grade 60) inside of the column for specimen NSF4. For these
L distance between two loading points of the beam
specimens, the results were buckling of the beam flange and web
Mp beam plastic moment
outside the tube without any local buckling or signs of yielding in
Paxial axial load applied on the column during the test
the tube. This is the same behaviour that is expected from through
Pno nominal pure axial compressive strength of the column
beam connections in case of beam failure.
r column to beam flexural strength ratio
Group three (Joint failure) included specimens NSF6 and NSF7. The
S geometric scale factor
only difference between the specimens was existence of a thin web in-
S0 initial scale factor
side the joint in specimen NSF7 to investigate the effect of the web in
tf beam flange thickness
joint. In these specimens both column and beam were much stronger
tw beam web thickness
than the joint such that the failure was governed to be occurred in the
Vcsn nominal shear strength of the concrete core
joint in order to understand the distribution of the joint shear force be-
Vf nominal shear strength of the flange
tween the joint component i.e. the tube, as well as the beam web and
Vj horizontal shear force of the joint
the concrete core inside the joint.
Vn nominal joint shear strength
Vtn nominal shear strength of the steel tube
Vwn nominal shear strength of the beam web
3. Finite element models
Wc density of concrete
ϕ reduction factor of nominal shear strength
To study the behaviour of through beam connection to CFCST col-
εc elastic compressive strain corresponding to 0.4fc′
umn, three finite element models were proposed using the ABAQUS Ex-
εc1 compressive strain corresponding to fc′
plicit programme [18]. The models exhibit the linear, nonlinear and post
εt elastic tensile strain corresponding to ft
failure behaviours of the connection in three cases of connection failure;
γ material density
column, beam and joint shear failure. Specimens NSF1 and NSF2 as well
υ Poisson ratio
as NSF4 to NSF7 were selected for this study. As previously described in
σc concrete compressive stress
Section 2, the specimens were divided in three groups based on the
∑M p the sum of plastic moment of the beam
types of failure.
∑M c the sum of the nominal flexural strength of the columns
The cruciform–shape (as in the experimental programme) was se-
lected to represent the interior joint in moment resisting frames sub-
jected to lateral loads which the moment distribution causes inflection
points to be formed at approximately the mid-span of the beams and
and effect of beam web or concrete core inside the joint. The objectives the mid-height of the columns. These points were subjected to shear
of the study are to investigate the behaviour of the connection under force. Fig. 2 shows the deformed joint with vertical shear forces applied
three different failure modes: column, beam and joint shear, in terms at the inflection points of the beam in opposite directions while the in-
of connection capacity to develop the full flexural capacity of the flection points of the column were fixed for translational movement.
beams, contribution of the joint components in resisting the joint This system simulates the joint deformation in the laterally loaded
shear force in the panel zone as well as load transferring from beam frame.
flange to the joint through finite element analysis and verification The typical components of the connection for specimen NSF7 are
with existing experimental results. Finally, the connection behaviour shown in Fig. 3. The components included the steel tube and jacket,
under different axial load level on the column is investigated through beam with attached threaded rods, rigid caps for column top and
parametric studies. bottom, concrete core and an interface. The interface was a compo-
nent without thickness which was attached inside the tube as well
2. Summary of experimental test programme as around the beam flange and web inside the tube for defining inter-
action between steel and concrete. In addition, fillet weld between
Experimental investigation of through beam connection to CFCST tube and beam was modelled for specimens NSF1, 2, 8 as shown in
column under monotonic loading was conducted by Elremaily and Fig. 4. No full penetration weld between the tube and the beam
Azizinamini [8].The test programme included seven specimens which was modelled but they were joined together by common nodes at
were symbolized as NSF1 and NSF2 as well as NSF4 to NSF8 as shown the appropriate places. No adhesion was also considered between
in Fig. 1 and Table 1. In all specimens, the steel beam was completely the steel and the concrete core as it generates a small force with no
passed through the steel tube and welded to it by fillet or full significant effect. The following sections present the development
146 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162

Fig. 1. Specimen details: (a) NSF1; (b) NSF2; (c) NSF4 & 5; (d) NSF8; (e) NSF6 &7 [8].

of nonlinear three-dimensional finite element models of the
specimens.
3.1. Element types
Fig. 3 also shows the typical component meshes for specimen NSF7.
The element size was considered such that it could satisfy a good accu-
racy and a reasonable computational time. In addition, reduced integra-
tion and appropriate hourglass control were considered for the
elements. The components were meshed by appropriate type of ele-
ments as follows:
Steel tube, jacket and beam: Four-node shell element (S4R) with
three translational and three rotational degrees of freedom at each
node;
Concrete core and fillet weld: Eight-node solid element (C3D8R)
with three translational degrees of freedom at each node; this element
is able to consider concrete cracking, crushing and weld fractured in
three orthogonal directions at each integration point.
Rebar or threaded rod: Two nodes linear beam element (B31) with
three translational and three rotational degrees of freedom at each
node;
Interface: Surface element (SFM3D4R). This element had three
translational degrees of freedom at each node with no stiffness or
strength while appropriate mass density should be assigned to it.
3.2. Boundary condition and loading
The boundary condition and loading on the model are shown in
Fig. 3. The references points at column caps were constrained for
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 147

Table 1
Summary of the test specimens.

Step 1. Beam section properties and beam plastic moment.

Beam section d (mm) bf (mm) tf (mm) tw (mm)

W18*50 457 190 14.5 9

W18*35 450 152 10.8 7.6
W16*31 403 140 11.2 7.0
Built-up 445 203 44.5 12.7a
a
: beam web thickness inside the tube is 6.4 mm for specimen NSF7.

Step 2. Specimen information and column flexural strength.

Specimen Special detail Beam Column

Section Mp (kN-m) Section (mm) Paxial (kN) P axial Mc (kN ‐ m)

P no

NSF1 Fillet welds W18*50 500.4 ϕ305 ∗ 6.4 890 0.17 301.4
NSF2 Fillet welds W18*50 500.4 ϕ305 ∗ 9.5 979 0.16 400.9
NSF4 Full pen. weld + rebar W18*35 374.2 ϕ406 ∗ 6.4 1423 0.18 637.6
NSF5 Full pen. weld W18*35 390 ϕ406 ∗ 6.4 1512 0.19 642.1
NSF8 Fillet welds W16*31 295.9 ϕ406 ∗ 6.4 1690 0.21 641.8
NSF6 No beam web inside the pipe Built-up 1211.4 ϕ406 ∗ 6.4* 1690 0.22 1285.3
NSF7 Thin beam web inside the pipe Built-up 1211.4 ϕ406 ∗ 6.4* 1468 0.19 1282.0
*: the tube outside the joint was strengthened by a steel jacket of 6.4 mm thickness.

Step 3. Ratio of column to beam flexural strength and ratio of joint shear force to joint component shear strength.

ϕVn (kN)
r ¼ ∑M c
Group number Specimen VJ (kN) Vf Vn (kN) VJ
ϕV n
∑M p
Vwn Vtn Vcsn

1 NSF1 0.6 1518 28 562 682 936 1546 0.98

NSF2 0.8 1430 28 562 1016 0 1124 1.27
2 NSF4 1.70 1500 14 662 1078 1503 2280 0.66
NSF5 1.65 1561 15 593 1078 1513 2239 0.70
NSF8 2.17 1283 15 500 1078 1485 2155 0.59
3 NSF6 1.06 3165 329 0 1078 1469 2013 1.57
NSF7 1.06 3605 329 517 1078 1469 2375 1.52

translational and rotational movements except rotational movement
around Y axis to allow full rotation at column ends in plane of load-
ings. In addition, the movement in the vertical direction (Z) for the
top cap was considered to be free due for application of the axial
load on the column. The nodes on the beam at the lateral bracing
places were also restrained against movement in the lateral direction
(Y).
Similar experimental loading conditions were applied on the
model. In step one; the axial load was applied at references point at
the top cap and it was constant during the step two. In step two,
two equal and vertical velocity loads were applied at the beam
end's reference nodes at two opposite directions. A special
300 mm/s rate of velocity was monotonically used for the loading
rate. Velocity controlled loading provided a more stable system in
the nonlinear stage rather than force controlled loading. This rate
was achieved by comparing the kinematic energy with the internal
energy when the effect of dynamic analysis could be neglected. The
real rate, which was much smaller than this rate, resulted in longer
analysis with little effect on the accuracy of the results. In order to
define the beam failure, linear buckling analysis was employed
using the original perfect geometry of the specimen in accordance
with the buckling shapes resulted from the eigen buckling analysis.

3.3. Material properties

The kinematic bilinear stress–strain relationship was considered

Fig. 2. Deflected interior joint subjected to lateral load at beam ends.
for the steel and weld materials as shown in Fig. 5. For specimens
NSF4, 5 and 8 which the beam failure was occurred, a value of α =
0.5 was used to define strain hardening for the steel material after
several validations of the results between the model and experimen-
tal test while the full plastic stress was defined for other specimens.
Von Mises yield criterion was used to define the material yield sur-
face as well as an associated flow rule to determine the plastic defor-
mation. For all steel and weld materials, the modulus of elasticity
(E s), density (γ) and Poisson ratio (υ) were assumed to be
200 GPa, 7800 kg/m3 and 0.3, respectively. The yield and ultimate
strength of the steel tube and beam were obtained from the steel
coupon testing as shown in Table 2, while for weld material, the
148 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162

Fig. 3. Typical meshing, boundary condition and loading on the model of specimen NSF7.

value was considered based on property of electrode E7018 which the EC2 [19] as shown in Fig. 6a. The modulus of elasticity of the con-
was used in designing of the specimen NSF8 [16]. crete (Ecm) is given in Eq. (1).
To model behaviour of concrete in compression and tension, an
equivalent uniaxial stress–strain relationship was used according to

0 1 0
Ecm ¼ 9:5 f c þ 8 3 Ecm in GPa and f c in MPa ð1Þ

The compression curve was divided into three parts i.e. the elastic
range, the nonlinear parabolic portion and the descending slope. The
value of the first part was the proportional limit up to stress of 0.4fc′
and strain of εc, where, fc′ is the cylinder concrete compressive strength

Fig. 4. Typical meshing of fillet weld for specimens NSF1, 2 & 8. Fig. 5. Stress–strain relationship for steel materials.
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 149

Table 2
Mechanical properties of tested steel coupons [8].

Specimen Coupon Yield stress (MPa) Tensile strength (MPa)

NSF1 & 2 Beam flange 302 442

Beam web 341 467
NSF4 Beam flange 343 501
Beam web 356 499
NSF5 Beam flange 358 500
Beam web 319 494
NSF6 & 7 Built-up flange 292 518
Built-up web 392 519
Web inside 334 494
NSF8 Beam flange 334 472
Beam web 294 473
NSF1 Tube wall 374 499
NSF2 Tube wall 371 482
NSF4 to 7 Tube wall 443 554

Fig. 7. The exponential function of tension softening model.

of the concrete. For the nonlinear parabolic part, the relation between
concrete stress (σc) and strain (εc) was obtained as follows:
assumed to be 2350 kg/m3 and 0.2, respectively. Compressive strength
  of concrete cylinder samples (fc′) as a representative of the concrete
kn−n 2
0 εc εc1
σc ¼ f ; n¼ ; k ¼ 1:1 Ecm  0 ð2Þ core of the column is presented in Table 3.
1 þ ðk−2Þn c εc1 fc
Parameter and tensile behaviour of concrete.

where the strain εc1 in relation to fc′ is equal to 0.0022 [20].

The descending part can be used to define the post failure for con-
crete compression behaviour in specimens in where concrete crushing
occurred. The descending slope can be considered to cease at a stress
value of 0.85fc′ [21]. The ultimate strain of concrete at failure is equal
to 0.0035 according to EC2 [20] and BS 8110 [22].
The tensile stress in concrete increases linearly with the slope of Ecm
to the strain before the concrete cracks and decreases to zero once the
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
concrete cracks as shown in Fig. 6b, where f t ¼ 0:623 f c Þ is concrete
tensile strength. Cracking was defined using tension stress versus
crack displacement according to the exponential function [23] as
shown in Fig. 7. The concrete cracking damage plasticity was defined
for the specimens. The concrete damage plasticity model presumes a
non-associated potential plastic flow. The Drucker–Prager hyperbolic
function was used as the flow potential. In this model, concrete param-
eters like material dilation angle (Ψ) and flow potential eccentricity (ε)
were taken as 25 and 0.1, respectively. In addition, the ratio of biaxial
compressive strength to uniaxial compressive strength (fbo/fco) was
taken as 1.16. These values were determined based on a study which
was done by Zhong T. et al. [24] for concrete filled steel tube column.
The materials density (γ) and Poisson ratio (υ) for concrete core were
3.4. Interaction
The accuracy of the finite element analysis results in this study is de-
pendent on interaction between the steel and the concrete core. Based
on earlier literature, different types contact interactions between steel
and concrete have been applied in composite connections. The interac-
tion included perfect bond condition between steel and concrete [25],
gap element [16] and three-dimensional interface elements [9]. A thin
layer of material as an interface element between the steel and concrete
was used to model the contact interaction [26].
In this study, an interface part was first placed and attached to the
beams inside the tube as well as around the tube. No thickness was con-
sidered for the interface part and it was meshed by surface element
which has no stiffness and no strength. The tie constraint was used to at-
tach the interface to the steel by node to surface method. This constraint
included a master surface and slave surface. The steel was considered to
be the master surface and the interface as the slave surface. Meshing
should be refined for slave surfaces to achieve a more accurate result
for the tie constraints [13]. After that, contact interaction was defined
between the interface and the concrete core using general contact
where surface elements can be defined around the shell elements. To

Fig. 6. Stress–strain relationship for behaviour of concrete a) compression, b) tension.

150 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162
Table 3
Concrete strength of tested samples [8].
Specimen fc′(MPa)
NSF1 41.6
NSF2 38.9
NSF4 33.9
NSF5 34.3
NSF6 & 7 32.4
NSF8 33.1
define general contact, some text comment, such as *CONTACT
CLEARANCE ASSIGNMENT and *CONTACT CONTROL ASSIGNMENT
were defined in the programme.
Both tangential and normal contacts were employed to define
contact properties between the interface and the concrete core. Dif-
ferent friction coefficient value of 0.2–0.6 between steel and con-
crete was used by other researchers [27–32]. As the composite
column is not sensitive for the value of friction coefficient in steel
and concrete [32], the friction contact between the parts was defined
using coulomb friction with friction coefficient of 0.3 [32] which
agrees with test results [8] and a finite element model of through
beam connection [16]. Geometry scaling, which is a form of softened
pressure-over closure relationship was used to model the normal
contact between the parts as shown in Fig. 8. This model provides
a simple interface to increase the default contact stiffness (k dflt )
when a critical penetration is exceeded. The penetration measure
(dp) is defined either directly or as a fraction of the minimum ele-
ment length in the contact region. Each time the current penetration
exceeds a multiple of this penetration measure, the contact stiffness
is scaled by a geometric scale factor (S), Ki = S0 ⋅ kdflt ⋅ Si − 1 is the stiff-
ness for each segment where, i is segment member and S0 is initial
scale factor.
3.5. Types of failure
In order to investigate the post failure behaviour of through beam
connection to CFCST column, types of failure based on the connection
groups and experimental test results [8] should be correctly defined
in the model. As previously described in Section 2, this paper is going
to study the connection behaviour under three types of failure:
Fig. 8. Softened pressure–overclosure relationship — geometry scaling.
column, beam and joint shear failure. In group column failure, be-
cause the column is weaker than the beams, the failure was occurred
in the column. Defining concrete cracking and fracturing of fillet
weld between beam flange and tube wall as well as tube wall tearing
along the fillet weld are the most important failure criteria in this
group. In group beam failure, buckling of the beam flange and web
outside the tube should be defined to study post failure of the con-
nection. As the column remains in elastic range, defining concrete
cracking and crushing have no significant effect on the behaviour of
the connection. For joint shear failure, concrete crushing and tube
fracture in the joint are the most important failure criteria in the
connection.
3.6. Analysis solution
Abaqus Explicit was employed for analysis of the specimens,
which is suitable for nonlinear materials and geometry, large defor-
mation, concrete damage, contact, and discontinuous parts [18].
Available analysis, such as general static in the Abaqus Standard
was used for initial analysis. However, it caused a convergence prob-
lem and stopped the analysis at the beginning of the second step. The
results of the RIKS method also resulted in a convergence problem
[33].
4. Numerical results
The behaviour of the specimens was presented in terms of beam tip
force–storey drift, beam tip force–joint distortion and shear strain of the
panel zone relationships, connection rigidity and distribution of axial
stress at beam flange of the specimens. The results were verified against
the experimental test results where it is possible. Discussion on the re-
sults was carried out by comparison of the finite element results be-
tween the specimens.
4.1. Verification of the beam tip force versus storey drift
The beam tip force–drift curves from the finite element analysis
were compared to the experimental test to ensure the accuracy of the
model as shown in Fig. 9. In all specimens, good agreement was
achieved between the model and experimental results. The model pre-
dicted the maximum capacity of the specimens accurately. In the anal-
ysis, the beam loading was continued to identify the post failure
behaviour of the specimens. As shown in Fig. 9, the post failure behav-
iour in the analytical model was similar to that of the experimental
test for all specimens.
In addition, the failure mode of specimens NSF1, NSF5 and NSF7
(as a representative of each group) are compared between the FEA
and experimental test results. The results showed that the models
could predict the failure mode of the specimens. As shown in
Fig. 10, the fillet weld between beam flange and tube wall was frac-
tured in specimen NSF1, so the failure took place in the column.
Due to yielding and buckling of the beam flange, most of the defor-
mation in specimen NSF5 was related to hinge formation in the
beam outside the tube. This indicated that the failure of the speci-
mens took place in the beam. Significant panel deformation, tube
tearing and concrete crushing in the joint of specimens NSF6 and 7
showed the joint failure.
4.2. Beam tip force–joint distortion relationship
The beam tip force versus joint distortion from the analytical
model was compared for the specimens NSF1 and NSF5 as shown
in Fig. 11 as well as for specimens NSF6 and NAS7 in Fig. 12. The
force was obtained as the average force at the loading points of the
beam. Joint distortion was defined as the deviation of the corner an-
gles of the panel zone from the right angle and calculated using the
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 151

Fig. 9. Comparison of FEA and experimental beam tip force versus storey drift for the specimens.

displacements of the panel corner nodes in the analytical model. As
shown in Fig. 12 and comparing results between FEA and experi-
mental test, it can be seen the model is able to exhibit correctly
the joint distortion and shear strain at the joint in specimen NSF6
and 7. Also the results show that the value of the joint distortion
and shear strain of the joint is much smaller than allowed value in
specimen NSF5. For more validation of the model, compressive diag-
onal strain of the concrete in the joint was compared between FEA
and experimental test for specimen NSF7 as shown in Fig. 13. The
value of the compressive diagonal strain of the concrete in the
joint shows the significance of compression strut of the concrete in
the joint.
152 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162

Fig. 10. Comparison of failure mode between FEA and experimental for the specimens.

4.3. Distribution of the joint shear force to the joint components were comprised of the tube, beam web inside the tube, the beam
flange and the concrete core in the panel zone. Fig. 14 shows the dis-
The horizontal shear force was distributed between the joint tribution of joint shear force components versus storey drift. The
components at the mid height of the joint. The joint components joint shear force component was normalized against the joint shear
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 153

Fig. 11. Comparison of joint distortion and shear strain of the joint.

Fig. 12. Comparison of joint distortion and shear strain of the joint between FEA and
force of each component which is obtained from available equation experimental test.

[11] as shown in Table 1. Based on the results, the beam web was
the first component to yield. The flat portion at the end of the curve
related to the web indicated the beam web yielding for all speci-
mens. After web yielding, the additional shear force was resisted by
the tube and concrete core. The tube and concrete core reached to
maximum value only in specimens NSF6 and NSF7 which indicate
the joint failure was occurred. In these specimens, parts of the web
outside the joint also participated in resisting the joint shear force
as shown in Fig. 14-c and d. Fig. 15 shows the distribution of the
shear stress in the tube wall and web outside the joint for specimen
NSF7. Based on the results, when the tube shear strength is de-
creased, the shear stress of the web outside the joint is increased.

4.4. Distribution of axial stress in the top beam flange

Mechanism of load transfer from the beam flange to the joint was
also evaluated through finite element analysis. The distribution of the
longitudinal stress in the top beam flange for specimen NSF1, NSF5
and NSF7 is shown in Fig. 16a, b and c. The comparison between the
value of the longitudinal stress at beam flange inside and outside of
the tube confirmed that tensile beam flange forces were transferred sig- Fig. 13. Comparison of compressive diagonal strain of the concrete in the joint between
nificantly to the beam flange inside the tube especially in specimens FEA and experimental test for specimen NSF7.
154 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162

Fig. 14. Distribution of joint shear force versus storey drift for the specimens.

NSF5 and NSF7. Also Fig. 17 shows the distribution of axial stress at top 4.5. Connection rigidity
and bottom level of the top beam flange of specimen NSF7. Based on the
results, the axial stress values adjacent to the tube wall indicate the for- The rigidity of the connection for the specimen NSF5 was investigat-
mation of plastic hinge at the beam flange. ed through finite element analysis. The results were determined
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 155

Fig. 15. Distribution of shear stress in tube wall and web outside the joint for specimen
NSF7.

according to stiffness index proposed by AISC specification [34]. The in-

dexes are defined as 2EI/L for a pinned connection and 20EI/L for rigid
connection where E, I and L are modulus of elasticity, moment of inertia
and the length of the steel beam respectively. The moment at column
face versus relative beam-to-column rotation for the specimen NSF5 is
shown in Fig. 18. The relative beam-to-column rotation was measured
at the joints at intersection of the top and bottom of the beam flanges
and tube wall as well as rotation of the node at the center of beam
web inside the joint. Based on the comparison of the connection secant
stiffness of the pinned and rigid connection, specimen NSF5 is a rigid
connection.

4.6. Distribution of connection rotation

Fig. 19 shows the distribution of connection rotation between

the column, panel zone and beam at the center of the joint and
along the beam axis for the specimens. Total rotation of the connec-
tion is sum of rotation of column, panel zone and beam which the
value is shown in the figure for the last drift. Based on the results,
for specimens NSF1 most rotation is related to the column rotation
which the failure is column failure. For specimen NSF5 which the
failure took place in the beam outside the joint, most of rotation
was related to the beam rotation at plastic hinge outside the joint
especially after forming the plastic hinge. While in specimen NSF7
the value of column and panel zone rotation was much bigger
than beam rotation. This indicated that the joint failure is occurred
in the specimen.

5. Parametric studies

The behaviour of through beam connection to CFCST column under

different axial load level on the column was investigated through a se-
ries of parametric studies. The boundary and loading conditions of the
specimens are changed such that the horizontal load is applied at col-
umn top to simulate the lateral load of the specimens while some trans-
lational and rotational movement at column and beam ends are fixed as
shown in Figs. 20 and 21. The horizontal displacement at column top
causes additional moment at the joint, while this moment was ignored Fig. 16. Distribution of longitudinal stress in the top beam flange.
in the previous model. As shown in Table 4, specimens NSF1, NSF5 and
NSF7 were selected as a representative of three types of failure; column,
beam and joint shear failure groups respectively. The last number after
the specimen name is the axial load level on the column. The axial load was previously analysed and verified against existing experimental
level of 0, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 was considered for this study. It should be test results according to Section 4. The effect of the column axial load
noted that the specimens under axial load level of approximately 0.2 levels are investigated for column tip force capacity, joint distortion,
156 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162

Fig. 17. Distribution of longitudinal stress in the top beam flange at positive and negative
surfaces for specimen NSF7.

connection rigidity, normalized moment at column face, shear strength

of the joint components as well as axial stress distribution of the beam
flange to the joint. The following sections present the behaviour of the
specimens under the column axial load levels.

5.1. Column tip force capacity

Fig. 22a, b and c show column tip force versus storey drift under dif-
ferent axial load for specimen group in column failure, beam failure and
joint shear failure respectively. As shown in the figures for specimens in
column failure group, ductility of the specimens are increased with the
increasing of the column axial load level. As previously mentioned, the
connection failure in these specimens is fillet weld fractured between
the tube wall and beam flanges. Higher axial load on the column caused
lower tension stress at the fillet weld, therefore the weld fractured is de-
layed and ductility of the specimens is increased. In specimens of beam
failure group, both ductility and column tip force are significantly de-
creased with increasing axial load level on the column. However as

Fig. 18. Connection rigidity for specimen NSF5. Fig. 19. Distribution of connection rotation between the column, joint and beam.
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 157

Table 4
Specimen detail with different column axial load levels.

Group number Specimen P axial Paxial (kN)

P no

1 NSF1-0 0 0
NSF1-0.2 0.2 1047
NSF1-0.4 0.4 2094
NSF1-0.6 0.6 3141
2 NSF5-0 0 0
NSF5-0.2 0.2 1592
NSF5-0.4 0.4 3183
NSF5-0.6 0.6 4776
3 NSF7-0 0 0
NSF7-0.2 0.2 1545
NSF7-0.4 0.4 3090
NSF7-0.6 0.6 4636

Fig. 20. Deflected interior joint subjected to lateral load at column top.
indicates that the specimens in beam failure group with different axial
load level on the column are rigid. For specimens in joint shear failure
group, the column tip force value as well as the ductility is approximate-
ly the same for the specimens. The results show that the axial load level
has no significant effect for the specimens.

shown in Fig. 23, the normalized moment at column face versus storey 5.2. Panel distortion
drift has same behaviour for the specimens. The moment at column face
were normalized against plastic moment of the beam based on Table 1. Fig. 25 shows comparison of column tip force versus panel distor-
Fig. 24 shows evaluation of connection rigidity of the specimens. It tion for the specimens in the three groups. The allowed value of

Fig. 21. Typical meshing, boundary condition and loading on the model of specimen NSF7-0 to 0.6.
158 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162

Fig. 23. Comparison of normalized moment at column face versus storey drift for
specimens NSF5-0.0 to NSF5-0.6.

results, the panel distortion for specimens in beam failure group is

smaller than the allowed value and satisfied the specification.

5.3. Joint shear capacity

Three main joint components to resist the joint shear force of the
specimens are tube, web and concrete core inside the joint. However
the beam flange and parts of beam web outside the tube are also
contribute to resist the joint shear force of the specimens. Due to
its significant value, these two components are only investigated
for specimens in joint shear failure group. It is noted that the value
of flange shear force depends on the beam flange thickness which
is very thick only for specimens in joint shear failure group.
Figs. 26–29, show the comparison of normalized tube, web, core
and flange shear force for the specimens. The shear force of the
joint components is normalized against their related values based
on Table 1. Based on the results, all three main components contrib-
ute to resist joint shear force of the specimens in the three groups
under different axial load level on the column. The tube shear force
reached to maximum capacity only for specimens in joint shear fail-
ure group. The value of the tube shear capacity is 15% more than the

Fig. 22. Comparison of column tip force versus storey drift for the specimens.

shear strain for the tube and web is also shown in the figure. It is
noted that the maximum value of panel distortion should be limited
to four times of shear strain of the tube and web [34]. Based on the Fig. 24. Comparison of connection rigidity for specimens NSF5-0.0 to NSF5-0.6.
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 159

Fig. 26. Comparison of normalized tube shear force versus storey drift for specimens.

Fig. 25. Comparison of column tip force versus panel distortion for the specimens.

value obtained from the formula based on Table 1, while the web is variable from 95% to 125% of the maximum capacity based on
reached up to 95% of the maximum capacity in both column and Table 1 for specimen of NSF7-0.0 to 0.06 respectively. Fig. 30 shows
joint shear failure groups. The core shear capacity of the joint is in- the distribution of the axial force on the column between tube web
creased with increasing axial load level on the column such that it and core at the centre of the joint for the specimens. Based on the
160 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162

Fig. 27. Comparison of normalized web shear force versus storey drift for specimens.
Fig. 28. Comparison of normalized core shear force versus storey drift for specimens.

results, the force is gradually decreased in the tube and the web
while is increased for core concrete in the joint. Higher axial load of
the core has increased the core shear capacity. As shown in Fig. 31,
the shear force of the beam web outside the joint is increased with
increasing the axial load level for specimens NSF7-0.0 to NSF7-0.6.
5.4. Distribution of flange axial stress to the joint
Fig. 32 shows comparison of distribution of flange axial stress at
drift 2% for specimens NSF5-0.0 to NSF5-0.6. Based on the results,
the axial load level had no significant effect on the distribution of
 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162 161

Fig. 29. Comparison of normalized flange shear force versus storey drift for specimens
NSF7-0.0 to NSF7-0.6.

tension axial stress of the beam flange to the joint, while the com-
pression axial beam flange force which is directly transferred to the
beam flange inside the joint is increased with increasing of the
axial load level.

6. Conclusion

Numerical study of through beam connections to Concrete Filed

Circular Steel Tube (CFCST) column were investigated under mono-
tonic loading. The parameters investigated included different col-
umn to beam flexural strength ratio, fillet or full penetration weld
to connect the beam to the tube wall, using rebar inside of the col-
umn and effect of beam web or concrete core inside the joint. Nonlin-
ear finite element modelling of the specimens was developed by
ABAQUS programme to provide a wider investigation of the speci-
mens under different axial load level on the column. The results
can be concluded as follows:

1. Good agreement was obtained between the results of the analy-

sis model and existing experimental test after comparing the
beam tip force–storey drift relationships, failure mode of the
connection, joint distortion and shear strain of the joint
components.
2. The model could correctly predict the linear, nonlinear and post-fail-
ure behaviours of the connection for the three types of connection
failure.
3. The specimens in beam failure group could develop their beam plas-
tic moment under different axial load levels on the column.
4. The beam web, tube and concrete core participated to resist the hor-
izontal shear force in all specimens. In the panel zone, the beam web
was the first component to yield, and then the shear force was dis-
tributed to the tube and concrete core.
Fig. 30. Comparison of compression axial force versus storey drift for tube, web and core of
5. The joint reached to the maximum capacity only for specimens in specimens NSF7-0.0 to NSF7-0.6.
joint shear failure group and the axial load level had no significant ef-
fect on the joint shear force capacity. However the more axial load
caused higher core shear capacity of the joint.
6. Based on the comparison of the connection secant stiffness of the Acknowledgments
pinned and rigid connection, specimen NSF5-0.0 to 0.6 is rigid
connection. The study presented herein was made possible by the University of
7. Most of the tensile beam flange force of the specimens was directly Malaya Higher Impact Research (HIR) Grant: UM.C/HIR/MOHE/ENG/
transferred to the beam flange inside the tube in specimens with ei- 57 and University of Malaya Research Grant (UMRG): RP004C-13AET.
ther beam failure or joint failure. The authors would like to acknowledge the support.
162 M.M.A. Khanouki et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 144–162
Fig. 31. Comparison of shear force of beam web outside the joint versus storey drift for
specimens NSF7-0.0 to NSF7-0.6.
Fig. 32. Comparison of distribution of flange axial stress at drift 2% for specimens NSF5-0.0
to NSF5-0.6.
References
[1] S.P. Schneider, Y.M. Alostaz, Experimental behavior of connections to concrete-filled
Steel tubes, J. Constr. Steel Res. 45 (1998) 321–352.
[2] J. Beutel, D. Thambiratnam, N. Perera, Cyclic behaviour of concrete filled steel tubu-
lar column to steel beam connections, Eng. Struct. 24 (2002) 29–38.
[3] J. Nie, K. Qin, C.S. Cai, Seismic behavior of connections composed of CFSSTCs and
steel–concrete composite beams—experimental study, J. Constr. Steel Res. 64
(2008) 1178–1191.
[4] Y. Qin, Z. Chena, X. Wang, Experimental investigation of new internal-diaphragm
connections to CFT columns under cyclic loading, J. Constr. Steel Res. 98 (2014)
33–44.
[5] Y. Qin, Z. Chena, X. Wang, Elastoplastic behavior of through-diaphragm connections
to concrete-filled rectangular steel tubular columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 93 (2014)
88–96.
[6] Y. Qin, Z. Chen, B. Rong, Component-based mechanical models for axially-loaded
through-diaphragm connections to concrete-filled RHS columns, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 150-163 (2014).
[7] S.-M. Choi, S.-H. Park, Y.-S. Yun, J.-H. Kim, A study on the seismic performance of
concrete-filled square steel tube column-to-beam connections reinforced with
asymmetric lower diaphragms, J. Constr. Steel Res. 66 (2010) 962–970.
[8] A. Elremaily, A. Azizinamini, Experimental behavior of steel beam to CFT column
connections, J. Constr. Steel Res. 57 (2001) 1099–1119.
[9] K.-J. Shin, Y.-J. Kim, Y.-S. Oh, T.-S. Moon, Behavior of welded CFT column to H-beam
connections with external stiffeners, Eng. Struct. 26 (2004) 1877–1887.
[10] K.-J. Shin, Y.-J. Kim, Y.-S. Oh, Seismic behaviour of composite concrete-filled tube
column-to-beam moment connections, J. Constr. Steel Res. 64 (2008) 118–127.
[11] C.-H. Kang, K.-J. Shin, Y.-S. Oh, T.-S. Moon, Hysteresis behavior of CFT column to H-
beam connections with external T-stiffeners and penetrated elements, Eng. Struct.
23 (2001) 1194–1201.
[12] C.C. Chen, N.J. Lin, Experimental investigation of flange plate connections between
concrete-filled tube column and steel beam, 13th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Vancouver, BC Canada, August 1–6 2004.
[13] A. Azizinamini, Y. Shekar, Design of through beam connection detail for circular
composite columns, Eng Struct. 17 (3) (1995) 209–213.
[14] A. Azizinamini, M. ASCE, S. Schneider, M. ASCE, Moment connections to circular
concrete-filled steel tube columns, J. Struct. Eng. ASCE (February 2004) 213–222.
[15] ASCE, Task committee on design criteria for composite structures in steel and con-
crete, guideline for design between steel beams and reinforced concrete columns,
J. Struct. Eng. ASCE 120 (8) (August 23 1994) 30–57.
[16] A. Elremaily, A. Azizinamini, Design provisions for connections between steel beams
and concrete filled tube columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 57 (2001) 971–995.
[17] ACI Committee 318–05, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI
318-95) and Commentary (ACI 318R-95), American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
MI, 1995.
[18] Standard user's manual, Version 6.6, Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorensen, USA, 2006.
[19] EN1992-1-1, Eurocode-2: Design of Concrete Structures, Part 1: General Rules and
Rules for Building, CEN, 2004.
[20] ENV1992-1-1, Eurocode-2: Design of Concrete Structures, Part 1: General Rules and
Rules for Building, CEN, 1992.
[21] E. Ellobody, B. Young, D. Lam, Behaviour of normal and high strength concrete-filled
compact steel tube circular stub columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 62 (2006) 706–715.
[22] BSI.BS 8110, Parts 1, 2. Code of Practice for Design and Construction, British Stan-
dards Institution, London, 1997.
[23] H. Cornelissen, D. Hordijk, H. Reinhardt, Experimental determination of crack soft-
ening characteristics of normal weight and lightweight concrete, Heron 31 (1986)
45–56.
[24] T. Zhong, W. Zhi-Bin, Y. Qing, Finite element modelling of concrete-filled steel stub
columns under axial compression, J. Constr. Steel Res. 89 (February 2013) 121–131.
[25] J. Nie, K. Qin, C.S. Cai, Seismic behavior of connections composed of CFSSTCs and
steel–concrete composite beams—finite element analysis, J. Constr. Steel Res. 64
(2008) 680–688.
[26] Y.M. Alostaz, S.P. Schneider, Analytical behavior of connections to concrete-filled
steel tubes, J. Constr. Steel Res. 40 (1996) 95–127.
[27] J. Garzón-Roca, J.M. Adam, P.A. Calderón, I.B. Valente, Finite element modelling of
steel-caged RC columns subjected to axial force and bending moment, Eng. Struct.
40 (July 2012) 168–186.
[28] H.T. Thai, B. Uy, M. Khan, Z. Tao, F. Mashiri, Numerical modelling of concrete-filled
steel box columns incorporating high strength materials, J. Constr. Steel Res. 102
(November 2014) 256–265.
[29] M. Pagoulatou, T. Sheehan, X.H. Dai, D. Lam, Finite element analysis on the capacity
of circular concrete-filled double-skin steel tubular (CFDST) stub columns, Eng.
Struct. 72 (August 2014) 102–112.
[30] J. Moon, R. C.W, L. D.E., L. H.E., Analytical modeling of bending of circular concrete-
filled steel tubes, Eng. Struct. 42 (September 2012) 349–361.
[31] L.H. Han, S.H. He, F.Y. Liao, Performance and calculations of concrete filled steel
tubes (CFST) under axial tension, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (November 2011)
1699–1709.
[32] D. Lam, X.H. Dai, L.H. Han, Q.X. Ren, W. Li, Behaviour of inclined, tapered and STS
square CFST stub columns subjected to axial load, Thin-Walled Struct. 54 (2012)
94–105.
[33] S.E. Kim, H.T. Nguyen, Finite element modeling and analysis of a hybrid steel–PSC
beam connection, Eng. Struct. 32 (2010) 2557–2569.
[34] ANSI/AISC 341-10, Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, American Insti-
tute of Steel Construction (AISC), Chicago, USA, 2010.