Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

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

Prefabricated connection for steel beam and concrete-filled steel tube

column
Chenting Ding a, Xuebei Pan b, Yu Bai a, *, Gang Shi c
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia
b
School of Civil Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, Anhui Province 230009, China
c
Key Laboratory of Civil Engineering Safety and Durability of China Education Ministry, Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing
100084, China

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

Article history: A new type of connection system with steel beam and concrete-filled steel tube (CFST) column is proposed
Received 30 March 2019 in this paper. This type of connection system uses internal stiffeners and high-strength threaded steel rods
Received in revised form to connect the steel beams in two directions with the assistance of side plates pre-welded on the column,
11 August 2019
intending to serve for high-rise buildings where moderate or high ductility is required, and is geometrically
Accepted 23 August 2019
Available online 29 August 2019
possible to be covered within the wall or floor space therefore offering architectural pleasing. The force
transfer mechanisms of the connection are important for the corresponding load-carrying capacities and
may be different in the two beam directions. In order to investigate the mechanical properties of the
Keywords:
Concrete-filled steel tube
connection system, four different specimens, including interior and exterior connections with corre-
Steel structures sponding columns and beams in two directions, were made and examined under monotonic loadings,
Beam-column connection further with comparison to FE modelling results. The results of experimental and numerical investigations
Prefabrication indicate the proposed connection system offers satisfactory stiffness and load-carrying capacities. Force
Bolted connection transfer mechanisms are discussed with assistance from stress and strain responses identified from vali-
Moment-rotation behaviour dated FE modelling in details. Design considerations are further highlighted for implementation in practice.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Due to their ductility and high capacity, concrete-filled steel
tubes (CFSTs) are commonly used as columns in building structures.
The infilled concrete is confined by the steel tube, resulting in a
triaxial state of compression whereby both load capacity and
ductility are improved. Axial compression behaviours [1e3] and
bending behaviours [4e6] of CFST columns were widely studied
and all the evidences indicate that both compressive and bending
capacities of CFST columns are high.
One of the challenges for implementation of CFST members in
building structures is the development of proper connection ap-
proaches. Investigations of connections between steel beams and
CFST columns have therefore received important attention. Generally,
such connection specimens for experimental studies are vertically
loaded at beam ends and are constrained at the top and bottom ends
of the column, and the deformation capacities of connections can be
quantified through equivalent storey drift angle [7]. Such steel beam
to CFST column connections can be categorized into two groups [8]:
connections that attach only to the steel tube of the CFST column, and
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: chenting.ding@monash.edu (C. Ding), yu.bai@monash.edu
(Y. Bai).
connections that also have elements embedded in the concrete core of
the CFST column. For the former, usually no proper measure is
employed to stiffen the panel zone of the joint. For example, blind
bolts were proposed for extended end-plate connections and flush
end-plate connections to link end plates to the steel tube, as investi-
gated in [9,10]. The experimental results indicated that an increased
end plate thickness can evidently enhance the stiffness and reduce the
rotation capacity of these two kinds of connections. Alternatively, the
flanges of steel beams can be directly welded to the surface of the CFST
column. As found in experimental and numerical investigations
conducted in [8,11], this type of connections was associated with low
flexural strength due to cracked welds. Overall, the two design
methodologies of connections ([9,11]) did not employ any measure to
stiffen the panel zone. Therefore, the column steel surface could be
bent outward by the beam flanges through tension, resulting a rela-
tively low moment-rotation stiffness. Connections with these design
methodologies can be classified as semi-rigid connections according
to the experimental results for the initial elastic stiffness.
From this point of view, moment-rotation stiffness and capacity
might be improved if the joint panel zone is stiffened. A practical way
to stiffen the panel zone is through the use of external diaphragms as
stiffening members; this method has been widely considered in
engineering practice [12]. An external diaphragm is an annular plate
surrounding the column and welded to the steel tube surface. A

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.105751
0143-974X/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
connection may consist of 2 external diaphragms, normally corre-
sponding to the upper and lower flanges of the steel beam (Fig. 1a).
Previous studies [8,13e15] have shown that properly designed
connections with external stiffeners could offer improved moment-
rotation stiffness and capacity. For example, in [8], a connection with
external diaphragms offered 18% higher initial stiffness and 20%
greater capacity than a connection of the same size but without
external diaphragms, that is, where the beam was directly welded to
the steel tube. A noticeable advantage of this kind of connection is
that concrete can be poured into the column tube conveniently
because no other structural components are inside the steel tube.
However, because the diaphragm stiffeners occupy external space
and cannot be fully concealed within the wall or floor, their visibility
within the indoor space may not be aesthetically pleasing.
The joint panel zone can be stiffened by structural elements
embedded in the concrete core. An internal diaphragm (Fig. 1b), as a
horizontal steel plate within the column, welded to the interior steel
surface and with a hole normally at the centre for concrete casting, has
been used to stiffen joint panel zones [12]. Again, such a connection
may include 2 internal diaphragms, corresponding to the upper and
lower flanges of the steel beam. The shear capacity of steel beam to
CFST column connections stiffened by internal stiffeners was inves-
tigated in [16]. It was found that the shear strength of the panel zone
stiffened by internal stiffeners was about 130% of the design requr-
iement and the column steel surface was not obviously bent outward.
A theoretical study on the multi-linear load-deformation relations of
the internal diaphragm connection between plate and tubular col-
umn with concrete filling using yield line method was provided
specifically by Fukumoto [17,18]. Further experimental studies [19]
showed that connections with internal diaphragms could provide
high moment-rotation stiffness, together with satisfactory moment
capacity that allowed beams to fail prior to the joint. Shear behaviour
of the joint panel zone was studied in [20] and such zones stiffened by
internal diaphragms were also studied in [21], where the shear force
and shear deformation relationship was formulated for the panel
zone. Compared to the external diaphragms, internal diaphragms are
in the column steel tube and surrounded by concrete. Therefore, anti-
rust processing may not be necessary for internal diaphragms.
However, it should be noted that in such cases the internal diaphragm
often has a large hole in the centre for concrete pouring, therefore
requiring a large internal diaphragm plate. Consequently, large cross-
sections of the steel tubes in CFST columns are also needed. As well,
welding of diaphragms inside a steel tube is laborious.
Another way to enhance joint stiffness is to situate the steel beam
through the steel tube so that the beam section can stiffen the joint
panel zone. This configuration requires making I-shaped holes (for the
Fig. 1. Illustrations of various types of beam to CFST connections (a) with external diaphragm configuration; (b) with internal diaphragm configuration; and (c) with through beam
or steel rods.
I beam section) in the steel tube of the CFST column. A series of ex-
periments performed in [22] investigated the ductility of such con-
nections. It was found that when the design principle of strong
column and weak beam was considered, the connections were very
ductile and the equivalent drift angle could reach 9.6%. A design
guideline for this kind of connection was developed in [23] based on
theoretical, numerical and experimental analyses. It was recom-
mended that the column-to-beam strength ratio should be greater
than 1.5 for connections in which full penetration welds were used to
join the beam to the column, or should be greater than 2 for con-
nections in which fillet welds were used. Again, the beam passing
through the column may affect concrete pouring through the steel
tube. Therefore, threaded steel rods were proposed to pass through
the steel tube and concrete core in the panel zone of the CFST column.
The steel rods were embedded in the concrete and extended to the
outer surfaces of the steel tube, and were bolted to 2 angle plates
(Fig. 1c) on the steel beams on two sides of the column. Such con-
nections were developed for the steel beam to CFST column connec-
tion where threaded steel rods were placed to pass through the
column in [24]. Cyclic bending loads were applied to the connections
and experimental results indicated that such connections offered
satisfactory deformation capacities with equivalent storey drift angles
greater than 6%. Another steel beam to CFST column connection was
examined in [25], where the column steel tube was made with I-
shaped holes for the steel beam and with circular holes for threaded
steel rods to pass through the panel zone (Fig. 1c). Experimental
studies were conducted for such connections subjected to bending
moments; the results showed that they had good ductility and could
reach an equivalent storey drift angle of more than 5%. It should also be
noted that such penetrating steel rods were also used for connection
systems between CFST columns and reinforced concrete beams, in
which steel bars passed through the connection horizontally without
a steel tube in this region, while lateral hoop reinforcements were
required to confine the concrete core in the connection zone to
compensate for the interruption of the steel tube [26,27].
Several configurations have been developed for the connections
between steel beams and CFST columns. It appears that connections
with stiffened panel zones may offer better moment rotational
stiffness and capacity than those without. However, current practice
for such connections with internal or external diaphragms requires a
large amount of site work including full penetration welding or the
inconvenience of concrete casting. Also, from architectural point of
view, it is desirable to have columns concealed within walls. In this
study, a new connection system (Fig. 2) is proposed that considers
the requirements of high moment-rotation stiffness, rapid on-site
installation and architectural appeal. The design concept and
 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
Fig. 2. Proposed beameCFST column connection.
configuration in detail are introduced in the following. Furthermore,
4 specimens of the new connection system were prepared and were
tested under static bending. The experimental results are presented
and discussed in this paper. Detailed FE analyses were conducted
and the modelling results are compared and verified against ex-
periments. Based on the experiments and FE analyses of the pro-
posed connection, the stiffness, ductility of connection, and forces
distributed in stiffening members are studied thoroughly.
2. Design concept and configuration
In the proposed connection system, no internal diaphragm or
external diaphragm is employed. Instead, the panel zone is stiff-
ened by 2 internal stiffeners in the Y direction (shown in Fig. 2) and
4 high-strength circular threaded steel rods in the X direction
(where the Y direction is the weak axis direction for the column
section while X is the strong direction). An internal stiffener offers
greater bending and tensile stiffness than 2 steel rods, due to the
inertial moment of its cross-section. Therefore, the internal stiff-
ener is used in the Y direction. Conventional horizontal di-
aphragms, including internal and external diaphragms, are
replaced by internal vertical stiffeners, thereby offering more space
in the column steel tube for concrete casting. In the other direction,
threaded rods are made of high-strength steel, making them strong
enough for axial tension forces. Both stiffening member types do
not require large internal space or larger steel tubes, which enables
the column section to be relatively small or identical to the wall
thickness, permitting installation within the wall, and thereby of-
fering architectural appeal. In this connection system, beams are
not welded to the column but are bolted to the column with the
assistance of side plates or flange cleats (see Fig. 2). Therefore, on-
site welding work is reduced.
Fig. 3 shows the fabrication and installation process. In the fac-
tory, 4 rectangular holes are drilled in the column for internal stiff-
eners to pass through the column, and 8 circular holes or slotted
Fig. 3. Installation process (a) components are welded to column before transport to construction site; (b) on-site beam installation and fillet welds; and (c) steel rods installation.
3
holes are drilled in the column for threaded steel rods to pass
through the column. Then, 2 internal stiffeners are inserted into the
column through the rectangular holes and are welded to the column
by fillet welds (see Fig. 3a). All the lower flange cleats, lower side
plates, and fin plates are welded to the column by fillet welds. Next,
the column with all the welded components is transported to the
construction site. On site, the steel beam can be installed by joining
the lower flange cleats, lower side plates and fin plates using high-
strength bolts as shown in Fig. 2. Subsequently, the upper side
plates and flange cleats are welded to the column by fillet welds as
indicated in Fig. 3b, and are then bolted to the beam end using high-
strength bolts. In this way, the steel beam can be placed in position
easily using the prefabricated lower side and fin plates and the
connection approach can also tolerate geometrical inaccuracy or
imperfection through the on-site upper side and fin plates.
Compared with the installation processes of conventional internal or
external diaphragms, the installation process of this connection
system requires much less on-site welding work and therefore may
be faster because full penetration welds are not involved. In the next
step, steel rods are passed through the column and tightened on both
sides. Finally, self-compacting concrete is cast into the column.
3. Experimental program
3.1. Specimens and material
The experimental investigation considers two variables. One is
the bending direction, i.e. about the strong axis (X axis) or weak axis
(Yaxis) of the column section, as the moment-rotation behaviours of
the connection system along different directions can be different
because the configuration of threaded steel rods is in X direction
while that of internal stiffeners is in Y direction. The second variable
is the location of the connection, i.e. with an interior column inside a
building, or an exterior column at the periphery of a building. Four
specimens were therefore designed and named as SX1, SY1, SX2 and
4 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
SY2. The beginning letter “S” denotes the specimen for experimental
investigation rather than FE modelling. The second letter “X” or “Y”
means the direction of bending (see Fig. 2a). X or Y direction is the
strong or weak axis of the column in bending. The number “1” means
the connection for interior column and “2” for exterior column. In a
specimen for the connection with an interior column (SX1 or SY1),
two beams with I-shaped sections (Fig. 4) in either X or Y direction
were installed to the column side face. In a specimen for exterior
connection (SX2 and SY2), only one beam with I-shaped sections
(Fig. 4) in either X or Y direction were installed to the column side
face. To allow the column to be concealed within a wall, the column
has a rectangular section with the side length of 440 mm in the X
direction and 220 mm in the Y direction (see Fig. 4). Moreover, the
beam in specimen SY2 is eccentrically attached to the column and
aligned to the column edge so that the column is invisible outside
the wall. The eccentricity (distance between the centreline of the
beam and the centre of the column) is 110 mm. It should be noted
that when the beam is loaded with bending moment, the column is
subject to torque induced by the eccentricity.
The height of the column in each specimen is 2.82 m and the
span length from the beam end to the centre of the column in each
specimen is calculated to be 2.53 m. It should be noted that the
height and length are determined to introduce the ends of the
beams and columns of the specimens as inflection points of cor-
responding members in a potential building prototype. On that
basis, the equivalent storey drift angle qd can be calculated by Eq.
(1) [7], in which D1 and D2 are the vertical displacements at the
ends of 2 beams for specimens SX1 and SY1. In specimens SX2 and
SY2, D1 is the vertical displacement of the beam end and D2 equals
zero. D3 is the horizontal displacement at the top of the column and
D4 is the horizontal displacement at the bottom of the column;
Lbeam is the span length of the beams connected to the column and
Hcolumn is the height of the column.
D1  D2 D3  D4
qd ¼  (1)
Lbeam Hcolumn
It should be noted that the thickness of each column is 220 mm
and is close to the thickness of common walls. The dimensions of
each side plate are 250  170  10 mm. The dimensions of each
Fig. 4. Specimens (a) SX1; (b) SY1; (c) SX2; and (d) SY2.
flange cleat are shown in Fig. 4a and the thickness of the stiffener is
30 mm. The dimensions of each fin plate for the connection be-
tween the column and the beam web are 260  105  10 mm. The
dimensions of each internal stiffener for the connection in the Y
direction are shown in Fig. 4b and its thickness is 30 mm.
All the steel beams, column steel tubes, flange cleats, side plates
and internal stiffeners were made of Q345 steel (with the nominal
tensile yielding capacity of 345 MPa). The concrete inside the column
was C50 (with the nominal compressive capacity of 50 MPa). Three
150 mm concrete cubes were cast and cured in conditions similar to
those of the specimens, with the average measured cube strength of
52 MPa. The bolts to connect the 2 beam flanges with the flange cleat
or side plate were Grade 10.9 M22, with the exterior diameters of the
bolts being 22 mm. The bolts used to join beam webs to the fin plates
were Grade 10.9 M20. The threaded steel rods used to install the flange
cleat on the column had the diameter of 25 mm. They were placed to
go through the column and tightened with a wrench at both ends,
using class 10 hex nuts only for specimens SX1 and SX2, as shown in
Fig. 2a. Tensile coupon tests were conducted to measure the properties
of the steel in accordance with the standard AS1391e1991 [28] and the
results are shown in Table 1. The specimens were designed to have a
strong column weak beam system. Thanks to the concrete inside the
column sections, the moment capacity of the columns is much larger
than that of beams with a relative capacity ratio of 11.1 for specimens
SX1 and SX2 and of 6.2 for specimens SY1 and SY2.
Pretensions of the M20 and M22 bolts are determined in Eq. (2)
according to Eurocode 3 [29], in which fub is the ultimate tensile
strength of high-strength bolts (i.e.1000 MPa for this study); As is
the tensile stress area in the threaded region of the bolt and can be
determined according to ISO 898-1 [30], resulting in 245 mm2 for
M20 bolts and 303 mm2 for M22 bolts; gM7 is a safety factor rec-
ommended as 1.1 [29]. In this way pretension force Fp,Cd was
calculated as 156 kN for M20 bolts and 193 kN for M22 bolts and
was applied to bolts by a torque wrench.
0:7fub As
Fp;Cd ¼ (2)
gM7
 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
Table 1
Initial rotational stiffness of different specimens (unit: 106 N$m).
Nominal yield Tested yield
stress (MPa) stress (MPa)
Steel plate for beam flange 345 359
Steel plate for beam web 345 351
Steel plate for column 345 357
M20 & M22 bolts 990 N/A
Threaded steel rods 600 N/A
3.2. Experimental setup
The specimens were designed to be restrained at the two column
ends and loaded at the two beam ends for SX1 and SY1, or at one beam
end for SX2 and SY2. The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 5. To
provide adequate restraints and reaction forces to the specimens, the
frame system consists of four reaction frames in parallel (see Fig. 5a)
that are anchored with the strong floor, several transverse beams
(HB1, HB2, HB4, HB4-a, HB6) in between (to improve lateral stiffness)
and base beams between different reaction frames (see Fig. 5a).
Loading equipment includes a hydraulic jack to apply compression at
a constant level on the column top end of the specimens, and two MTS
actuators to apply vertical loads at the beam ends of the specimens.
Each actuator was pinned to the beam end at one side and also pinned
to the reaction frame at the other side. Both two column ends of the
specimens were connected to the reaction frame, where the top end
was restrained from horizontal movement but in-plane rotation was
allowed as it was pinned to the two transverse beams (HB6s see
Fig. 5b). The hydraulic jack was placed at the top end of the column
with a relatively small contact area, and was therefore unable to
provide effective restraint for rotational movement of the column top
end. The bottom of the column was restrained from horizontal
movement through the steel base plate bolted with the column end
using two M20 bolts (see Fig. 5c) along the neutral axis of the column
section. Again, this setup may not be effective to restrain rotational
movement of the column bottom end.
During the experiments, a compressive load of 1000 kN was
applied first on the column top of the specimens, corresponding to an
Fig. 5. Experimental setup (a) overview; (b) connection detail of column top; and (c) column base connection.
5
axial compression ratio of 0.4 (relative to the nominal strength) for the
CFST columns, representing the gravity load received from upper
Tested ultimate floors. This load was kept constant during the experimental process.
stress (MPa) Subsequently, in specimens SX1 and SY1 with interior columns with 2
485 beams installed, vertical loads were introduced in opposite directions
470 by the 2 actuators at the ends of the 2 beams, with identical loading
502 rates of 1 mm/s. The experiments stopped when the specimens lost
N/A
their load capacity or when any of the actuators travelled to its
N/A
maximum distance. In specimens SX2 and SY2 with an exterior col-
umn with only one beam installed, the experimental setup was
similar but only one actuator was used to apply one vertical load in the
upward direction at the beam end. To ensure safety, the centre of the
load point on the beam was 200 mm from the beam end.
3.3. Instrumentation
Strain gauges, linear variable displacement transducers (LVDTs)
and a total station digital theodolite (Hi-Target ATS-320R, with
precision for angle measurement of 5.6  104 degree and for dis-
tance measurement of 2 mm) were used to measure the strains and
displacements for specimens during experiments. The locations of
strain gauges are shown in Fig. 6a, where gauges on the flange and
web of the steel beams were used to evaluate the bending strain
and potential yielding of beams as well as for understanding of the
beam curvature. Other strain gauges near the bolt holes were used
to examine whether bolts were in contact with bolt holes. A strain
rosette was installed at the centre of the panel zone in the column
to measure the shear behaviour of the panel zone. Two LVDTs were
installed close to the beam flanges (Fig. 6b) to record the relative
displacements between the beam and the column. Such results
were necessary for further calculation of the relative rotation be-
tween beam and column. Loads and travel distances were auto-
matically recorded through the corresponding actuators.
Importantly, loading was paused every 30 s and the theodolite (see
Fig. 5a) was used to manually verify the horizontal displacements of 2
column ends and vertical displacements of 2 beam ends, considering
that the column ends might slip and move slightly due to the relax-
ation of the horizontal restraints as the stiffnesses of the reaction
6 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751

Fig. 6. Locations of (a) strain gauges; and (b) LVDTs.

frames cannot be infinitely large. Also, the travel distances recorded
by actuators might not accurately represent the vertical displace-
ments of beam ends due to possible slip between actuator and beam
end resulting in a slight incline of the actuator during loading. After
verification of the results recorded by the actuators, the vertical dis-
placements of the beam ends were calibrated by a factor of 1.07 to
make them consistent with the results measured by the theodolite.
4. Finite element (FE) modelling
FE models were established for all specimens using ABAQUS
2017. Two examples are shown in Fig. 7 for specimens SX1 and SY1.
Elements used in these FE models are eight-node solid elements
with full integration (C3D8), eight-node solid elements with
reduced integration (C3D8R), two-node beam elements (B31) and
two-node spring elements (Spring2). It should be noted that a
distance of 510 mm of each beam end measured from the surface of
the column is modelled with C3D8R elements, to capture the
formulation of plastic hinges on the beam and the potential local
buckling. The remaining parts of the steel beams might perform
more consistently as typical beams and therefore they are modelled
with B31 beam elements for computational efficiency. To achieve
deformation compatibility between these two element types, the
end cross-section of the solid elements is coupled with the node at
the end of the B31 beam element (Fig. 7), making the rotational and
translational movements of the end cross-section equal to those of
the end node in the beam element.
All the fin plates, flange cleats, side plates, steel rods, bolts,
column steel tubes, concrete cores and column bases were
modelled with C3D8R elements so that their stress distribution
could be captured. Considering that internal stiffeners (see Fig. 7b)
are key components for load transfer in specimens SY1 and SY2,
they were modelled with C3D8 elements to achieve better
computation accuracy. Threaded steel rods were modelled with
B31 two-node beam elements because they were subject to axial
forces and bending moments only, and the corresponding nuts
were modelled with C3D8R elements. These two kinds of elements
(B31 and C3D8R) were coupled again in the same way as for the B31
and C3D8R elements in the FE modelling of the steel beams. Each
fillet weld was modelled using a series of spring elements with
linear elastic material properties with a very large stiffness (rep-
resented in Fig. 7b and d by small dots). These spring elements bind

Fig. 7. Finite element model (a) SY1 model overview; (b) detail of SY1; (c) SX1 model overview; and (d) detail of SX1.
 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
together a series of node pairs between the two different members
such as the flange cleat and the column steel tube as shown in
Fig. 4a in order to understand the internal forces and stresses there
and the associated failure mechanism. The stiffness value was
defined to limit the maximum relative displacement between the
node pairs in this study to be less than 0.05 mm, corresponding to
1/200 of weld leg length; a similar approach was used in [31].
Surface-to-surface contact interactions were adopted between all
contact surfaces. The frictional coefficient of 0.3 [32] was used for steel-
to-steel contact, such as that between the bolt head and the surface of
the beam flange or between the bolt shank and bolt hole. The frictional
coefficient for steel-to-concrete contact was defined as 0.57 [33] for
the surface between the concrete core and steel tube, and the surface
between the concrete core and internal stiffeners was treated as steel-
to-concrete contact. As the surfaces of the steel threaded rods were
smooth because of the zinc coatings, the frictional coefficient was
considered to be zero. Pretension of bolts was applied according to Eq.
(2) in Section 3.1 and was introduced by decreasing the temperature,
as a common approach in such FE analysis [34]. Bilinear material
constitutive models were used for the material properties of all steel,
with the hardening ratio of 1% [33]. The constitutive model for
confined concrete was determined according to the stress-strain
relationship in [35], considering the concrete cracking.
5. Results and discussion
5.1. Load-displacement curves
The mechanical behaviours of specimens can be described in
terms of load-displacement curves as shown in Fig. 8, where the load
Fig. 8. Load-displacement curves of specimens (a) SX1; (b) SX2; (c) SY1; and (d) SY2.
7
is the vertical load applied to the beam end and the displacement is
the corresponding vertical displacement. Therefore, the slopes of
the curves represent the stiffness (loaded at beam ends) of the
specimens. Overall, the load capacities of 4 specimens are similar
(i.e. about 150 kN). As the stiffness of a beam-to-column specimen is
contributed from the stiffnesses of its beam and column members as
well as the connection between them, it can be found that the initial
stiffness of specimens with internal stiffeners (i.e. 2.6 kN/mm for
specimen SY1, 3.6 kN/mm for specimen SY2) is about 25% lower than
that of specimens with threaded steel rods (i.e. 3.7 kN/mm for
specimen SX1 and 4.6 kN/mm for specimen SX2). This suggests that
the beam-to-column specimens with threaded steel rods might
provide higher stiffness than the specimens with internal stiffeners.
However, such a stiffness difference of specimens is contributed not
only from the different connection methods (with rods or stiffeners)
but also the difference in column stiffness. For specimens SX1 with
steel rods in the connections, the column section provides its
moment of inertia in the strong direction, being about four times of
that in its weak direction for the specimens SY1 with internal stiff-
eners. Further discussion of the moment-rotation stiffness for the
connections along is presented in Section 5.3, where the effects from
column stiffness can be excluded.
The load-displacement curve of specimen SX1 is linear elastic
before the load reached 60 kN. When the loads increased to 60 kN
and the corresponding displacements at the 2 beam ends reached
16 mm, fillet welds between the flange cleats and the column were
subject to large horizontal internal forces and crack failure
occurred, at which time stiffness began to decrease while the
loading kept increasing. When the applied displacements at the
beam ends reached 50 mm, the force dropped sharply due to an
8 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
Fig. 9. Failure modes of SX1 and SX2: crack of fillet weld.
unexpected release of load in the actuators. That was not the
intention in the experiment but it was corrected shortly never-
theless. When the displacements reached 110 mm, the cracks in the
fillet welds between column and flange cleats became significant.
For safety considerations, therefore, the loading process was
stopped at 120 mm, corresponding to a storey drift of 5.2% (the
storey drift was calculated based on Eq. (1)). The load-displacement
curve of specimen SX2 before the load reached 70 kN is linear
elastic. When the displacement reached 30 mm, the load in the
actuator suddenly released but was also recovered shortly (similar
to that observed for SX1). Fillet welds between flange cleats and the
column on SX2 did not experience any premature failure but finally
cracked when the displacement reached 135 mm, corresponding to
a storey drift of 5.8%. The experiment was then stopped.
The load-displacement curve of SY1 is shown in Fig. 8c. After the
applied displacement reached 135 mm, the maximum vertical load
was reached (150 kN). Subsequently the loads began to drop, at
which time plastic hinges were formed at the 2 beam ends. To ensure
safety, the loading process was stopped at 180 mm, corresponding to
a storey drift of 7.7%. The beam of SY2 (Fig. 8d) was eccentrically
installed to the column, which therefore was subject to torque and
experienced slight rotational movement along its longitudinal axis,
causing the stiffness to decrease after the displacement reached
12 mm. A plastic hinge was formed at the beam when the
displacement reached 120 mm, after which the load began to drop.
The experiment was stopped when the actuator travelled to its
maximum displacement of 200 mm, corresponding to a storey drift
of 8.6%. All the specimens indicated satisfactory ductility, evidenced
by their maximum storey drifts of more than 5% achieved in the
experiments. The load-carrying capacities of specimens SY1 and SY2
were determined by the plastic hinges formed at the beam ends. The
Fig. 10. Comparison of failure modes for specimens SY1 and SY2 between (a) FE modelling; (b) experiment.
load-carrying capacities of specimens SX1 and SX2 were determined
by the cracking of the fillet weld.
FE results of load-displacement curves are also shown in Fig. 8.
The initial stiffnesses of all the specimens (Fig. 8) are agree well
with the corresponding experimental results. Meanwhile, the ca-
pacities of specimen SX2, SY1 and SY2 estimated from FE modelling
are also close to the corresponding experimental results. The ulti-
mate capacity of SX2 was slightly (about 10%) lower than the FE
modelling results, while the ultimate capacity of SY2 was compa-
rable to that of SY1 and was slightly (about 10%) higher than the FE
results. The ultimate capacity of SX1 was not reasonably described
in the FE results because the fillet welds were modelled with spring
elements with a linear elastic property. However, this modelling
approach does indicate the high stress at the welding locations
(therefore potential failures there) and does provide such insights
to further understand the failure mechanism.
5.2. Failure modes and yielding mechanisms
As shown in Fig. 9, specimens with threaded steel rods (SX1 and
SX2) failed by cracked fillet welds between the flange cleat and the
column steel tube. Specimens with internal stiffeners (SY1 and SY2)
did not fail during the tests, but plastic hinges formed at the beam
end on the flanges subject to compression (Fig. 10a). To further
examine whether there were any other failures in these 4 speci-
mens, the specimens were disassembled after the experiment. It
was found that all the bolt holes at different positions maintained
their initial shapes (Fig. 11), and the bolt shanks did not break,
indicating that the bolt holes and bolts did not fail.
The results of FE analyses also showed that the shear stress in
the fillet weld that finally cracked was large. As stated in Section 4,
spring elements (Fig. 7b and d) were used to model the fillet welds.
Shear stresses at two different loading levels (60 kN, 90 kN) were
determined based on the horizontal internal forces in the spring
elements modelling the fillet weld on the X axis in Fig. 12a (spec-
imen SX1), and are plotted in Fig. 12b (tension is positive). For
comparison, the shear stresses in the fillet welds on the X axis in
specimen SY1 (Fig. 12c) are also plotted in the same figure. It can be
seen in Fig. 12b that the shear stress distributed in the fillet weld in
specimen SX1 (the specimen with the interior column using steel
rods) is much more unevenly distributed than that in specimen SY1
(the specimen with the interior column using internal stiffeners),
especially from X of 0 to 30 mm where the shear stress is very large
on one side but small on the other. The fillet weld of specimen SX1
at X of 0 mm was subjected to the maximum shear stress and it is
the position that began to crack during the experiment. At this
point, when the load level reaches 60 kN, the maximum shear
 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751 9

Fig. 11. Bolt holes after experiment (a) in the beam; (b) in the fin plate.

stress in the fillet weld of SX1 is 490 MPa, corresponding to 2.4 flange of the beams in specimens SY1 and SY2 has yielded at this
times the maximum shear stress in SY1 (202 MPa at X of 100 mm) load level. When the load further increased, such local buckling
and this difference increases when the load is increased to 90 kN. became more obvious and finally a plastic hinge was formed there
That may be the reason for the fillet weld cracking in specimen SX1 for specimens SY1 and SY2.
but not in SY1.
The FE results of specimens SY1 and SY2 showed that plastic 5.3. Moment-rotation stiffness
hinges were formed at the beam ends (Fig. 10), in consistence with
the experimental results. Further comparison may indicate that the According to Eurocode 3 [29], a connection can be classified as
positions of the plastic hinges in the experiments were slightly rigid if the initial rotational stiffness Sj,ini satisfies the condition:
different from that in the FE models. The experimental results
showed the locations partially inside the bolted connection and kb EIb
Sj;ini  (3)
partially outside the region stiffened by the bolted connection Lb
(Fig. 10a); while those in the FE models were outside the stiffened
region (Fig. 10a). This may be because the bolt pretentions in the Moreover, a connection can be classified as pinned if the initial
experiments were less than those in the FE models. Nevertheless, rotational stiffness Sj,ini satisfies the condition:
such a difference in the locations of beam end is still minor. Because
0:5EIb
the strain gauges installed on the beam web and upper beam flange Sj;ini  (4)
Lb
(Fig. 6a) were along a cross section within the range of plastic hinge,
their strain values at different load levels (40 kN, 60 kN, 80 kN and In Eqs. (3) and (4), E is Young's modulus of the steel beam, Ib is
100 kN) are plotted in Fig. 13 to understand the strain distributions the moment of inertia of the beam, Lb is the span of the beam, equal
at this region and the variations of the strain distributions at to the centre-to-centre distance of 2 adjacent columns. kb is a factor
different load levels. The vertical axis refers to the positions of the related to the type of the structure, as 25 for a frame without
strain gauges along the beam depth where the value of 0 corre- bracing system.
sponds to the neutral axis. Strain results from FE models are also The initial rotational stiffness Sj,ini for specimens was deter-
plotted in the figure for a comparison with experimental results. At mined as the slope of the moment-rotation curve at the elastic
the load levels of 40 kN, 60 kN and 80 kN, it can be found that the stage, where the rotation and moment could be calculated using
strain distribution curves from specimen SY1 and SY2 are almost the measured results of LVDTs from Fig. 6b through the equations:
linear, indicating that the strain was proportional to the depth to
the neutral axis and therefore no plastic hinge was formed at these d1  d2
qc ¼ (5)
load levels. However, at the load level of 100 kN, the strain distri- l1;2
butions from both specimens show nonlinearity at the locations
near the lower beam flange (i.e. 150 mm below the neutral axis, M ¼ Fv Lbeam (6)
or 150 mm for the position in Fig. 13). This suggests that the lower

Fig. 12. (a) Position of fillet weld in SX1; (b) coupling forces of spring elements for modelling fillet weld; and (c) position of fillet weld in SY1.
10 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
Fig. 13. Strain distributions at beam end in the same cross section at different height of (a) SY1; and (b) SY2.
where d1 and d2 are the displacements recorded by LVDTs shown in
Fig. 6b, l1,2 is the distance between 2 LVDTs, Fv is the vertical load
applied by the actuator and Lbeam is the length of the beam. Table 2
shows the resulting initial stiffness of each specimen compared to
the values of rigid and pinned conditions according to the calcu-
lation results of the initial rotational stiffness.
In the Y direction, where internal stiffeners were used to form
the connection, the initial rotational stiffness of each specimen (SY1
with the interior column or SY2 with the corner column) satisfied
the rigid condition. Therefore, such configurations provided high
moment-rotation stiffness and these 2 connections could be clas-
sified as rigid for interior and exterior applications. In the X di-
rection where threaded steel rods were installed, although
specimens SX1 and SX2 should be classified as having semi-rigid
connections, their initial rotational stiffness was close to the rigid
boundary (about 85% rigid condition). Adequate moment-rotation
stiffness provided by the steel rod configurations was still well
demonstrated.
5.4. Load transfer of threaded steel rods and internal stiffeners
Threaded steel rods and internal stiffeners were embedded in
the concrete and were important components in the connection
configurations for both directions, as they could compensate for
core concrete in tension and prevent excessive deformation of the
steel tube flanges subjected to the forces transferred from the beam
ends. In this section, internal forces, including bending moments
and axial forces, of these components are clarified and compared
based on the FE results. The axial force and bending moment of
each component were calculated, based on the stress field for three
loading levels (60 kN, 90 kN, 120 kN at the beam end) as shown in
Figs. 14 and 15. In the figures, the upper stiffener is the internal
stiffener above the beam and the lower stiffener is the internal
stiffener below the beam for specimens SY1 or SY2. Also, because
specimens SX1 and SX2 were stiffened by 2 pairs of steel rods (2
upper rods and 2 lower rods, see Fig. 2a), the axial force or bending
moment of the steel rods shown in Figs. 14 and 15 is the sum of the
2 rods in the same horizontal row.
When the load was increased to 120 kN in the experiments, the
bending moment at the beam end became 253.2 kN$m for speci-
mens SX1 and SX2, i.e. 120 kN  (2.53 me0.2 m-0.22 m); and 266.4
kN$m for specimens SY1 and SY2, i.e. 120 kN  (2.53 me0.2 m-
0.11 m). Considering that the beam flanges only carried bending
moment whereas the beam web only carried shear force [36], the
bending moments at the beam end were formed by a compression
force at one beam flange and a tension force at the other. The
compression force or tension force was then 723 kN for specimen
SX1 and SX2, i.e. 253.2 kN$m/0.35 m, and 761 kN for specimens SY1
and SY2, i.e. and 266.4 kN$m/0.35 m. Such levels of compression
force and tension force were finally transmitted from the beam
flanges to the column. The compression force carried by the column
flange and the concrete inside the column may not be critical for
the connection. However, the tension force in specimens SX1 or
SX2 (denoted as FX,B in Fig. 16a) need to be carried by both the
column flange and the steel rods, and the tension force in speci-
mens SY1 or SY2 (denoted as FY,B in Fig. 16b) need to be carried by
both the column flange and the internal stiffeners. The column
flanges may bend outward due to the large tension on the column
flange (shown as distributed force qX, C or qY, C in Fig. 16), as the
inside concrete cannot aid in resisting tension. Therefore, it is
desirable to transfer more tension to the rods or stiffeners than to
the column flanges.
As indicated in Fig. 14, it was found that about 30% of tension
(238 of 723 kN) was carried through the steel rods for specimen
SX1 and 65% of the tension (490 of 761 kN) through the internal
stiffeners for specimen SY1. Similarly, 17% of the tension (140 of 723
kN) was transferred to the steel rods in SX2 and 65% of the tension
(490 of 761 kN) was carried by the internal stiffeners in SY2. These
results clearly indicate that the internal stiffeners within the CFST
could carry efficiently and transfer the majority of the tensile force
(over 60%), and this configuration is clearly more effective than that
using steel threaded rods. It should also be noted that the column
flanges (220 mm) in the X direction (Fig. 2) are much narrower than
those in the Y direction (440 mm). Therefore, the column flange in
the X direction may be more difficult to bend outward (due to its
smaller span between the 2 webs). This may also explain why a
higher proportion of tension was carried by the column flanges for
specimens SX1 and SX2 with the connection in the X direction.
Each of the vertical y axes in Fig. 15b to e show the bending
moments carried by the section of steel rods or internal stiffener
along their longitudinal direction, i.e. x coordinates shown in
Fig. 15a. It can be found that the steel rods in specimen SX1 or SX2
always carry much less bending moment than the stiffeners in
specimen SY1 or SY2, because a pair of rods offers a much lower
moment of inertia than a stiffener, and the nuts tightening the steel
rod might not effectively restrain the rotational movements of the
two sides of the rod. Therefore, the fillet welds shown in Fig. 12a in
specimen SX1 or SX2 had to help the rods carry more bending
Table 2
Initial rotational stiffness of different specimens (unit: 106 N$m).
SX1 SX2 SY1 SY2
Nominally pinned condition 6 6 5 5
Rigid condition 282 282 268 268
Initial rotation stiffness: Sj,ini 238 241 1051 1150
 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751 11

Fig. 14. Axial forces in stiffening members.

moment, resulting in an unevenly distributed horizontal force in
the fillet weld as shown in Fig. 12b.
It can be also found in Fig. 15b that the bending moment on the
left side of the lower stiffener in specimen SY1 is about five times
that on the right side. This is related to the force to which the
column steel tube and the core concrete were subject. As the left
actuator applied the vertical load upward while the right actuator
applied downward (Fig. 5a), thelower flange of the right beam was
under compression while the lower flange of the left beam was
under tension. The right side of the lower stiffener carried bending

Fig. 15. Bending moments of (a) longitudinal direction of stiffener and rod; (b) lower stiffener and rods in SX1 and SY1; (c) upper stiffener and rods in SX1 and SY1; (d) lower
stiffener and rods in SX2 and SY2; and (e) upper stiffener and rods in SX2 and SY2.
12 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
Fig. 16. Free body diagrams for (a) flange cleat of specimen SX1 or SX2; and (b) side plate and internal stiffener of specimen SY1 and SY2.
moment with the assistance of the surrounding concrete that was
under compression, whereas the left side of the lower stiffener
could only carry bending moment by itself because the surrounding
concrete was under tension and might already have reached its
tensile limit. However, the left side of the upper stiffener carries
bending moment with the assistance of the surrounding concrete
that is under compression, whereas the right side of the upper
stiffener can only carry bending moment by itself. Therefore in
Fig. 15c the bending moment on the right side of the upper stiffener
in specimen SY1 is much greater than that on the leftside.
The beam end of specimen SX2 with a corner column and steel
rods and the beam end of specimen SY2 with a corner column and
internal stiffeners were loaded upward in the experiments. The
upper flange of the beam carried compression force while the lower
flange of the beam carried tension force. Comparison of Fig. 15d and
e showed that the lower stiffener carried a greater bending
moment, about double that carried by the upper stiffener. This was
also caused by the lower stiffener which carried bending moment
with the assistance of the surrounding concrete which was under
compression, while the upper stiffener only carried bending
moment by itself as the surrounding concrete was under tension.
6. Conclusions
The present study proposed and examined a new prefabricated
connection system between steel beams and a concrete-filled steel
tube (CFST) column. In this new connection system, the panel zone is
stiffened by threaded steel rods in one horizontal direction and by
internal stiffeners in the other horizontal direction. Additional steel
plates including flange cleats, side plates and fin plates are fillet
welded to the CFST column in the factory and steel beams in two
directions can be joined to the column mainly through bolting. To
study moment-rotation behaviours of the connection in two di-
rections, 4 specimens were prepared considering both interior
connection and exterior connection scenarios. FE modelling was
further performed to understand the performance of the connection
system and the internal forces in the fillet welds, internal stiffeners
and steel rods in particular. On the basis of the experimental and
modelling results, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1) The proposed connection system showed high moment-
rotation stiffness in both horizontal directions. According to
the classification of connection rigidity in Eurocode 3, if this
connection system is used in moment-resisting frames, it can
achieve rigid connection in the same direction as the configu-
ration of internal stiffeners; and it can be a semi-rigid
connection with 85% of the stiffness of the rigid condition in the
same direction as the configuration of threaded steel rods.
2) Internal stiffeners and threaded steel rods in the connection can
effectively stiffen the panel zone, and none of the column
flanges in the specimens experienced noticeable bending
deformation. This is because either the internal stiffener or the
steel rods, rather than the column flanges, could help carry
tension force transferred from the beam flange. In specimens
SY1 and SY2 in the direction stiffened by internal stiffeners,
about 65% of the tension force from the beam flange was carried
to the internal stiffeners and the other 35% was carried to the
column flanges through fillet welds. In contrast, in specimens
SX1 and SX2 stiffened by steel rods, the proportion of tension
transferred from the beam flange to the steel rods was much
lower, being less than 30%, while the remaining 70% of the
tension was transferred to the column flanges.
3) Internal stiffeners in the connection system can effectively
transfer both axial force and bending moment, whereas threa-
ded steel rods may mainly transfer axial force. This is because a
pair of rods offers a much lower moment of inertia than a
stiffener, and the nuts tightening the steel rod might not effec-
tively restrain rotational movements of the two sides of the rod.
Therefore, the vertical fillet weld between the flange cleat and
the column steel tube in specimen SX1 or SX2 needs to assist the
threaded steel rods to carry more bending moment, resulting in
unevenly distributed horizontal force in the vertical fillet weld
plus associated cracking.
4) The proposed connection system also showed satisfactory
ductility for the moment-rotation response in the direction stiff-
ened by internal stiffeners. In this study the connection system in
this direction was able to develop a storey drift of 7% without
structural failure. The final failure was due to local buckling of the
beam flanges where a plastic hinge was formed about 350 mm
from the surface of the column in a satisfactorily ductile manner. In
the direction stiffened by threaded steel rods, the corresponding
story drift when the vertical fillet welds failed could still reach 5%
and this also provided a high deformation capacity.
To achieve convenient assembly of the connection system and
its acceptable mechanical performances, a few design consider-
ations may be expressed. For example, it may be better to have
slotted holes in the upper flange cleats for the threaded steel rods
rather than circular holes, as such holes allow the threaded steel
rods to easily pass through the flange cleats and column flanges and
provide tolerances to accommodate possible fabrication inaccuracy.
Moreover, the fillet welds between the flange cleats and column
 C. Ding et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 162 (2019) 105751
flanges require good quality because of high stresses there. In
addition, a thicker flange cleat with increased bending stiffness
may introduce better uniformly distributed stress in the fillet
welds, mitigating high stress concentration at the fillet weld
locations.
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful for support from the Australian
Research Council through the Discovery Project (DP180102208).
Thanks are also given to the technical support for the experiments
at the Faculty of Civil Engineering in Heifei University of Technology
and to Anhui Fuhuang Steel Structure Co., Ltd. for manufacturing
experimental specimens.
References
[1] S.P. Schneider, Axially loaded concrete-filled steel tubes, J. Struct. Eng. 124
(10) (1998) 1125e1138.
[2] F. Ding, Z. Yu, Y. Bai, Y. Gong, Elasto-plastic analysis of circular concrete-filled
steel tube stub columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (10) (2011) 1567e1577.
[3] T. Sheehan, X. Dai, T.M. Chan, D. Lam, Structural response of concrete-filled
elliptical steel hollow sections under eccentric compression, Eng. Struct. 45
(2012) 314e323.
[4] J. Moon, C.W. Roeder, D.E. Lehman, H.E. Lee, Analytical modeling of bending of
circular concrete-filled steel tubes, Eng. Struct. 42 (2012) 349e361.
[5] J.F. Hajjar, A. Molodan, P.H. Schiller, A distributed plasticity model for cyclic
analysis of concrete-filled steel tube beam-columns and composite frames,
Eng. Struct. 20 (4e6) (1998) 398e412.
[6] A.H. Zubydan, A.I. ElSabbagh, Monotonic and cyclic behavior of concrete-filled
steel-tube beam-columns considering local buckling effect, Thin-Walled
Struct. 49 (4) (2011) 465e481.
[7] P. Clark, K. Frank, H. Krawinkler, R. Shaw, SAC/BD-97/02 Protocol for Fabri-
cation, Inspection, Testing, and Documentation of Beam-to-Column Connec-
tion Tests and Other Experimental Specimens, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento,
California, U.S, 1997.
[8] S.P. Schneider, Y.M. Alostaz, Experimental behavior of connections to
concrete-filled steel tubes, J. Constr. Steel Res. 45 (3) (1998) 321e352.
[9] J. Wang, L. Zhang, B. Spencer Jr., Seismic response of extended end plate joints
to concrete-filled steel tubular columns, Eng. Struct. 49 (2013) 876e892.
[10] J.F. Wang, L.H. Han, B. Uy, Behaviour of flush end plate joints to concrete-filled
steel tubular columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 65 (2009) 925e939.
[11] Y.M. Alostaz, S.P. Schneider, Analytical behavior of connections to concrete-
filled steel tubes, J. Constr. Steel Res. 40 (2) (1996) 95e127.
[12] J.R. Liew, Design Guide for Concrete Filled Tubular Members With High
Strength Materials to Eurocode 4, Research Publishing, 2015.
[13] C. Cheng, L. Chung, Seismic performance of steel beams to concrete-filled steel
tubular column connections, J. Constr. Steel Res. 59 (3) (2003) 405e426.
[14] D. Zhang, S. Gao, J. Gong, Seismic behaviour of steel beam to circular CFST
column assemblies with external diaphragms, J. Constr. Steel Res. 76 (2012)
155e166.
[15] A.K. Dessouki, A.H. Yousef, M.M. Fawzy, Stiffener configurations of beam to
concrete-filled tube column connections, Steel Composite Struct. 17 (1) (2014)
83e103.
[16] T. Fujimoto, E. Inai, M. Kai, et al., Behavior of beam-to-column connection of
13
CFT column system, in: Proceedings of the Sixth ASCCS International Con-
ference on Steel-Concrete Composite Structures, 2000.
[17] T. Fukumoto, K. Morita, Connection between concrete-filled square steel
tubular column and steel beam reinforced with internal diaphgram: elasto-
plastic behavior of the local connection, J. Struct. Constr. Eng. 65 (2000)
175e182.
[18] T. Fukumoto, Local elasto-plastic behavior of steel beam to concrete-filled
square steel tube column moment connections- simple model of load-
deformation relations for connection details using internal diaphragms or
internal diaphragms with extended flanges, J. Struct. Constr. Eng. 617 (2007)
177e184.
[19] P. Doung, E. Sasaki, Load-deformation characteristics and performance of in-
ternal diaphragm connections to box columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 143
(2019), 106221.
[20] J. Fan, C. Liu, Y. Yang, Y. Bai, C. Wu, Shear capacity of 3D composite CFT joints
subjected to symmetric loading condition, J. Constr. Steel Res. 112 (2015)
242e251.
[21] T. Fukumoto, K. Morita, Elasto plastic behaviour of steel beam to square
concrete filled steel tube (CFT) column connections, in: S.A. Mahin, Y. Xiao
(Eds.), Composite and Hybrid Structures: Proceedings of Sixth ASCCS Inter-
national Conference on Steel-Concrete Composite Structures, 2000,
pp. 565e572.
[22] A. Elremaily, A. Azizinamini, Experimental behaviour of steel beam to CFT
column connections, J. Constr. Steel Res. 57 (2001) 1099e1119.
[23] A. Elremaily, A. Azizinamini, Design provisions for connections between steel
beams and concrete filled tube columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 57 (9) (2001)
971e995.
[24] L.Y. Wu, L.L. Chung, S.F. Tsai, C.F. Lu, G.L. Huang, Seismic behaviour of bidi-
rectional bolted connections for CFT columns and H-beams, J. Eng. Struct. 29
(3) (2007) 395e407.
[25] I.S. Sheet, U. Gunasekaran, G.A. MacRae, Experimental investigation of CFT
column to steel beam connections under cyclic loading, J. Constr. Steel Res. 86
(2013) 167e182.
[26] J. Nie, Y. Bai, C.S. Cai, New connection system for confined concrete columns
and beams. I: experimental study, J. Struct. Eng. 134 (12) (2008) 1787e1799.
[27] Y. Bai, J. Nie, C.S. Cai, New connection system for confined concrete columns
and beams. II: theoretical modeling, J. Struct. Eng. 134 (12) (2008)
1800e1809.
[28] Australian Standard, Methods for Tensile Testing of Metals, AS 1391, Stan-
dards Association of Australia, Sydney, Australia, 1991.
[29] CEN, Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures e Part 1e8: Design of Joints. ENV
1993-1-8, CEN, Brussels, 2005.
[30] B. ISO, 898-1, Mechanical Properties of Fasteners Made of Carbon Steel and
Alloy SteelePart I, Bolts, Screws and Studs With Specified Property
ClasseseCoarse Thread and Fine Pitch Thread, British Standards Institute,
London, UK, 2009.
[31] A. Zingoni, Research and Applications in Structural Engineering, Mechanics
and Computation, CRC Press, 2013 Aug 15.
[32] N. Gorst, S. Williamson, P. Pallett, L. Clark, Friction in temporary works, Res.
Rep. 71 (2003).
[33] B. Rabbat, H. Russell, Friction coefficient of steel on concrete or grout, J. Struct.
Eng. 111 (3) (1985) 505e515.
[34] T. Ireman, Three-dimensional stress analysis of bolted single-lap composite
joints, Compos. Struct. 43 (3) (1998) 195e216.
[35] L.H. Han, G.H. Yao, X.L. Zhao, Tests and calculations for hollow structural steel
(HSS) stub columns filled with self-consolidating concrete (SCC), J. Constr.
Steel Res. 61 (9) (2005) 1241e1269.
[36] C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano, Structural Steel Semirigid Connections: Theory,
Design, and Software, CRC press, 1999 Oct 27.