See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320086769

A study on rotational behaviour of a new industrialised building system

connection

Article  in  Steel and Composite Structures · October 2017

DOI: 10.12989/scs.2017.25.2.245

CITATION READS

1 235

3 authors:

Mostafa Moghadasi Abdul Marsono

Buali Sina University Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
5 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS    68 PUBLICATIONS   120 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Seyed Esmaeil Mohammadyan-Yasouj

Islamic Azad University, Najafabad Branch
2 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

LCC for Green Residential New Construction View project

A NUMERICAL AND ANALYTICAL STUDY ON OPTIMIZATION AND EFFICIENCY OF STRUCTURAL FORMS BY TWO-OUTRIGGER IN TALL BUILDINGS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abdul Marsono on 03 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Steel and Composite Structures, Vol. 25, No. 2 (2017) 245-255
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2017.25.2.245 245

A study on rotational behaviour of a new industrialised

building system connection

Mostafa Moghadasi 1, Abdul Kadir Marsono 2a and Seyed Esmaeil Mohammadyan-Yasouj 3b
1
Civil Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
2
Civil Engineering Faculty, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Skudai, Johor, Malaysia
3
Department of Structure and Material, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University of Najafabad (IAUN), Najafabad, Isfahan, Iran

(Received March 31, 2016, Revised April 15, 2017, Accepted July 25, 2017)

Abstract. The performance of an Industrialised Building System (IBS) consists of prefabricated reinforced concrete
components, is greatly affected by the behaviour of the connection between beam and columns. The structural characteristics
parameters of a beam-to-column connection like rotational stiffness, strength and ductility can be explained by load-rotation
relationship of a full scale H-subframe under gravitational load. Furthermore, the connection’s degree of rigidity directly
influences the behaviour of the whole frame. In this research, rotational behaviour of a patented innovative beam-to-column
connection with unique benefits like easy installation, no wet work, no welding work at assembly site, using a hybrid behaviour
of steel and concrete, easy replacement ability, and compatibility with architecture was investigated. The proposed IBS beam-to-
column connection includes precast concrete components with embedded steel end connectors. Two full-scale H-subframes
constructed with a new IBS and conventional cast in-situ reinforced concrete system beam-to-column connections were tested
under incremental static loading. In this paper, load-rotation relationship and ratio of the rigidity of IBS beam-to-column
connection are studied and compared with conventional monolithic reinforced concrete connection. It is concluded that this new
IBS beam-to-column connection benefits from more rotational ductility than the conventional reinforced concrete connection.
Furthermore, the semi-rigid IBS connection rigidity ratio is about 44% of a full rigid connection.
Keywords: Industrialised Building System (IBS); rotational behaviour; precast hybrid-steel concrete; experimental test;
beam-to-column connection

1. Introduction EC2 do not facilitate an innovation in precast concrete

There is a wide definition of Industrialised Building
System (IBS) in published literature. As a conclusion of the
above varied definitions, IBS is defined as “An innovative
building construction process using concept of mass-
production of industrialised system, produced at the factory
or onsite in the frame of controlled environments” (Stone et
al. 1995). The connection between IBS components
transfers the loads applied on the structure between the
components and finally to the foundation. Furthermore,
beam-to-column connections are the most important
connections in precast concrete frames as a common type of
Industrialised Building Systems (Elliott 1996). Implementa-
tion of a new IBS beam-to-column connection faces
problems due to new arrangement and consequent new
interaction between the connection elements, beam and
columns. The behaviour of a connection can be properly
assessed by experimental testing or successful performance
in the field (Loo and Yao 1995).
In terms of codes of practices, ACI 318, BS 8110 and
Corresponding author, Ph.D., Assistant Professor,
E-mail: mostafamoghadasi@yahoo.com
a
Ph.D., Associate Professor
b
Ph.D., Assistant Professor
beam-to-column connections even though the design and
analysis of precast structures are significantly affected by
their behaviour. However, the first suggested design of
joints and connections in precast structural concrete was
published by ACI-ASCE Committee 512 (1964). On the
other hand, PCI handbook and manuals give efficient
information for design and analysis of precast concrete
beam-to-column connections.
A satisfactory ductile, moment-resistant precast concrete
beam-to-column connection was developed to be an
earthquake resistant connection by Pillai and Kirk (1981).
In another study an improved version of the above beam-to-
column connection detail was structurally investigated by
Bhatt and Kirk (1985).
Some simple and moment-resistant precast concrete
beam-to-column connection details were suggested and
classified by Dolan et al. (1987). In addition, the feasibility
of using scaled models for experimental testing of precast
concrete connections was investigated (Dolan and Pessiki
1989). An experimental study on the behaviour of semi-
rigid precast concrete beam-to-column connections
subjected to seismic loads was conducted by Seckin and Fu
(1990) through testing of four full-scale specimens.
In addition to Stone et al. (1995), Cheok and Lew
(1991, 1993) tried to develop seismic resistant precast
concrete beam-to-column connections using experimental

Copyright © 2017 Techno-Press, Ltd.

http://www.techno-press.org/?journal=scs&subpage=6 ISSN: 1229-9367 (Print), 1598-6233 (Online)
246 Mostafa Moghadasi, Abdul Kadir Marsono and Seyed Esmaeil Mohammadyan-Yasouj
tests. They studied the connections in terms of strength,
ductility and energy dissipation characteristics. In another
in-line experimental study, moment-resisting precast
concrete frames with hybrid connections were analysed
under seismic loads (Cheok et al. 1998). It was tried to
develop a design guide for precast concrete hybrid
connections in regions of high seismicity using the results
of frames analyses and previous experimental tests.
Two types of precast reinforced concrete beam-to-
column connections recommended by PCI Committee on
Connection and the Australian Prestressed Concrete Group
were experimentally tested by Loo and Yao (1995). The
results were shown that the stiffness and ductility of the
precast concrete connections are higher than their
monolithic counterparts.
Furthermore, Englekirk (1995) tried to develop a ductile
beam-to-column connection to be employed in a moment
resisting frame. The experimental tests conducted showed
that the proposed beam-to-column connection performance
was better than cast-in-place and structural steel systems
under cyclic loading.
Various research works were conducted on precast
concrete beam-to-column connections by Elliott et al.
(2003). Considering the fact that the precast concrete beam-
to-column connections behave as semi-rigid connections,
they proposed that the global precast frame can be designed
semi-continuously. This semi-rigidity assumption may
result in more economical design in comparison with
pinned connections.
An experimental study was performed on five precast
concrete beam-to-column and one monolithic connection by
Khaloo and Parastesh (2003). As a result, the authors
concluded that the precast concrete connections provided
strength, ductility and energy dissipation capacity
comparable to the monolithic specimen.
Several beam-to-column connections were experi-
mentally tested and compared with the monolithic
connection by Ertas et al. (2006). Stiffness, strength,
ductility and energy dissipation were the bases of the
comparison.
Full-scale experimental investigation was reported by
performing and comparing full-scale tests on precast
concrete and monolithic H-shape subframes. In addition, as
a result of load-displacement curves of midspan the precast
connection showed a better structural performance than
reinforced concrete specimen (Rahman et al. 2007).
Although the number of research works published on
precast concrete beam-to-column connection is numerous,
but there is still lacking in the tests on nonlinear behaviour
of hybrid steel-concrete connections. Kulkarni and Li
(2009) reported that although the research studies done on
hybrid steel-concrete beam-to-column connections with
cast-in-place are few, the literature related to hybrid precast
concrete joints is rare.
A new hybrid steel-concrete beam-to-column connection
through nonlinear finite element method and four
experimental tests was investigated by Kulkarni and Li
(2009), Kulkarni et al. (2008) and Li et al. (2009). They
concluded that the high flexibility in the beam-to-column
joint of the precast concrete specimens causes higher
rotation of the precast beams compared with the cast-in-
place concrete specimen.
Kwong and Teng (2000) reported the results of their
experiments about eight precast concrete beams using a
hybrid connection consists of I-steel and concrete. They
investigated the effect of stirrup spacing and embedded
lengths of the I-steel on the failure load of hybrid beams
with hinge supports.
A hybrid precast steel-concrete beam system included an
H-steel and a reinforced concrete beam is studied through
three test specimens (Yang et al. 2010). It was concluded
that the flexural behaviour of the hybrid precast beam was
improved significantly by adding the longitudinal
prestressing tension force.
The crack pattern, modes of failure, ultimate strength
and ductility parameters of an IBS beam-to-column
connection were investigated and compared with
conventional reinforced concrete during the load-
displacement analysis (Moghadasi and Marsono 2012).
Marsono et al. (2015) investigated the structural
performance of an IBS beam in nonlinear state through
load-displacement relationship of beam, crack pattern,
mode of failure, stresses at concrete and connection
deformation.
In this paper, rotational behaviour of a new innovated
hybrid steel-concrete IBS beam-to-column connection
patented as Smart IBS is investigated through conducting
two full-scale experimental tests. Easy installation, no wet
work, no welding work at assembly site, using a hybrid
behaviour of steel and concrete, easy replacement ability,
and compatibility with the architecture are the features of
Smart IBS beam-to-column connection. Two H-subframes
constructed with IBS and conventional beam-to-column
connections were tested under two point monotonic loads
applied on one and two-third of the beam length. The
loading procedure is divided to elastic and ultimate rounds.
The rotational stiffness and ductility were investigated
through load-rotation curves. In addition, the degree of
rotational rigidity of the connection in different rounds of
loading was investigated.
2. Experimental models and tests specifications
2.1 Structural specifications of the models
Two set of full-scale H-substitute frames assembled with
IBS and conventional beam-to-column connections were
tested to investigate the rotational behaviour of them.
Choosing the full-scale H-shape subframe as models for
experimental set-up was due to the fact that, in opposite to
real conditions, redistribution of hogging bending moments
at the end of the beam is not allowed in full-scale tests using
cruciform set-ups. Although in a real structure the ratio of
bending moment to shear force at beam-to-column
connection is not constant under different loading types,
beam and column lengths and support conditions but in
cruciform models of connection testing the above ratio
remains constant during the performance of the test (Elliott
1998).
 A study on rotational behaviour of a new industrialised building system connection
(a)
(c)
Fig. 1 IBS model (a) elevation view; (b) beam-to-column connection assembly; and (c) section details
(All dimensions are in mm)
The first frame denoted as IBS is a prefabricated
concrete frame with Industrialised Building System (IBS)
beam-to-column connections. Another frame denoted as RC
is a frame with monolithic conventional reinforced concrete
beam-to-column connections. The structural details of the
IBS and RC models are given in Figs. 1 and 2, respectively.
The height of the columns and length of the beam are
similar in both models. In addition, cross sections
dimensions and reinforcement of reinforced concrete
portions of beams and columns are considered the same in
both models. The height of the columns, 1650 mm centre to
centre for bottom and top columns, is considered as one half
of the height of the real structures columns height because
of zero moment assumption in the middle point of the
column in a real frame under gravitational load. The total
height of H-subframes is 2 × 1650 mm = 3300 mm. The
free length of the beams is 3200 mm. The cross section
247
(b)
dimensions of reinforced concrete portions are 300 mm ×
300 mm in both models.
The precast concrete IBS components consist of one
IBS beam and two upper IBS column in addition to two
bottom IBS column were constructed and cast horizontally
and in separate mould, then they were surface brushed,
painted by white colour, transmitted to the loading frame
,assembled vertically and bolted together to form the IBS
H-subframe model. In the case of IBS model special
specifications (See Fig. 1) the IBS beam consists of a
precast reinforced concrete beam ended to built-in I-shape
steel connector embedded in concrete. The flange of steel
end connectors were welded to two 16 mm diameter
longitudinal reinforcements of IBS beam at top and bottom.
On the other hand, the upper and bottom IBS columns are
reinforced concrete columns ended to cloven box and
cruciform built-in steel connectors, respectively.
248 Mostafa Moghadasi, Abdul Kadir Marsono and Seyed Esmaeil Mohammadyan-Yasouj
(a)
Fig. 2 Conventional RC model (a) elevation view; and (b) detail sections
The longitudinal reinforcement bars of the IBS columns
were constructed as two welded together T 16 mm rebars at
each corner of the column sections. The upper IBS columns
were jointed to the bottom IBS columns through their steel
connectors by four pieces of 18 mm diameter of high
strength (8.8 bolt) hexagonal bolts. After the installation of
the columns, the IBS beam was erected and connected to
the steel connectors of the columns by four 18 mm pieces of
12.9 Allen bolts at each end. The stirrups longitudinal
distance is calculated and chosen to be equal to the shear
capacity of 6 mm diameter bars with100 mm longitudinal
spacing and 250 MPa yield stress.
In the case of conventional reinforced concrete model
(See Fig. 2), RC, two ends of the longitudinal T16
reinforcement bars of the beam were bent as 900 hooks and
tied to the column reinforcements for satisfaction of
moment resisting connection due to Eurocode 2 (2004)
provisions. Furthermore, average measured diameter of RC
model stirrup bars was 4.69 mm. Then, for achieving the
same shear capacity in RC and IBS model, the longitudinal
spacing is calculated and chosen as 177 mm. The whole
reinforcement bars forming the RC model were cast
horizontally in H-shape plywood formwork.
The precast concrete IBS components consist of one
IBS beam and two upper IBS column in addition to two
bottom IBS column were constructed and cast horizontally
and in separate mould, then they were surface brushed,
painted by white colour, transmitted to the loading frame
,assembled vertically and bolted together to form the IBS
H-subframe model. In the case of IBS model special
specifications (See Fig. 1) the IBS beam consists of a
precast reinforced concrete beam ended to built-in I-shape
steel connector embedded in concrete. The flange of steel
end connectors were welded to two 16 mm diameter
longitudinal reinforcements of IBS beam at top and bottom.
(b)
On the other hand, the upper and bottom IBS columns are
reinforced concrete columns ended to cloven box and
cruciform built-in steel connectors, respectively.
The longitudinal reinforcement bars of the IBS columns
were constructed as two welded together T 16 mm rebars at
each corner of the column sections. The upper IBS columns
were jointed to the bottom IBS columns through their steel
connectors by four pieces of 18 mm diameter of high
strength (8.8 bolt) hexagonal bolts. After the installation of
the columns, the IBS beam was erected and connected to
the steel connectors of the columns by four 18 mm pieces of
12.9 Allen bolts at each end. The stirrups longitudinal
distance is calculated and chosen to be equal to the shear
capacity of 6 mm diameter bars with100 mm longitudinal
spacing and 250 MPa yield stress.
In the case of conventional reinforced concrete model
(See Fig. 2), RC, two ends of the longitudinal T16
reinforcement bars of the beam were bent as 900 hooks and
tied to the column reinforcements for satisfaction of
moment resisting connection due to Eurocode 2 (2004)
provisions. Furthermore, average measured diameter of RC
model stirrup bars was 4.69 mm. Then, for achieving the
same shear capacity in RC and IBS model, the longitudinal
spacing is calculated and chosen as 177 mm. The whole
reinforcement bars forming the RC model were cast
horizontally in H-shape plywood formwork.
2.2 Materials specifications
Mechanical properties of steel parts obtained from
experimental tests are illustrated in Table 1. Grade 30
concrete was used in both IBS and RC models. However,
the concrete compressive strengths obtained from three
cylindrical specimens at the day of the IBS and RC models
tests were 30.6 MPa and 26.5 MPa, respectively.
 A study on rotational behaviour of a new industrialised building system connection 249

Table 1 Mechanical properties of steel

Diameter/thickness Elastic modulus Yield strength Yield strain Tensile strength

Type Model
measured (mm) (GPa) (MPa) (%) (MPa)
Steel plate IBS 9.80 171 363 0.13 437
IBS & RC 15.84 216 534 0.25 642
Steel bars
IBS 5.23 167 589 0.34 648
reinforcement
RC 4.69 259.5 581.5 0.22 627

Fig. 3 LVDT positions and measurement of displacements and rotation of beam-to-column connection in both models

2.3 Installation and instrumentation
The support conditions of the columns were constructed
with steel plates formed a box at each end of the columns.
Inside the above steel boxes, steel plates with 300 mm ×
150 mm × 10 mm dimensions were put to form the roller
and hinged support conditions at top and bottom of the
columns of the both models, respectively.
Total of eight LVDTs (Linear Variable Differential
Transformer) were installed at different positions of each
model to trace the displacements and then calculation the
relative rotation of beam-to-column connection. For
recording the loads applied, cylindrical load cells installed
between loading jacks and 300 mm × 300 mm × 25 mm
dimensions steel plates put on the beams.
The load cells and LVDTs were connected to a data
logger to record and save the results during the loading
steps (See Fig. 3 for channel numbers similar in both
models). Furthermore, one strain gauge installed on tensile
rebars in the beam mid span of both models.

(a) (b)
Fig. 4 Set-up of full-scale (a) IBS; and (b) RC model
250 Mostafa Moghadasi, Abdul Kadir Marsono and Seyed Esmaeil Mohammadyan-Yasouj
2.4 Loading specifications
After installation of models, at first round of loading, 10%
of ultimate predicted design load at increments of about
2.5% was applied on both models, and then decreased to
zero. This loading round was carried out as an initial round
for controlling the set-up of loading frame, jacks and
instrumentations. Second round of loading was performed
for investigating the elastic behaviour of models as 30% of
ultimate predicted load at increments of about 5% and then
unloading the model at previous steps to zero again. The
last loading round was applied for study the ultimate
behaviour of the models from zero until collapse. The loads
1 2
(P) were applied at and of the beams’ length (See Fig.
3 3
4). The loads were applied in form of two point loads on
1 middle part of the beam. In addition, the strain gauge
3 affixed on tensile rebars at mid span of IBS model
2
and of beam length for better simulation of uniformly
3
distributed loads transferred from connected slabs.
3. Results and discussions
3.1 Load-rotational behaviour
The rotational behaviour of the connections was
analyzed through load-rotation diagrams (Refer to Figs. 5 to
8) in last round of loading (ultimate loading round
described in Section 2.4). The rotation of each connection
was obtained from deflections of the beam and columns in
each H-subframe. Relative rotation of each beam-to-column
connection can be calculated as difference between beam
and column rotations:
Fig. 5 Load-rotation diagram of beam-to-column connection obtained from LVDT 4
∆𝑖 ∆𝑗
𝜃𝑖𝑗 = ∝𝑖 − 𝛽𝑗 = − (1)
𝐿𝑖 𝐿𝑗
where 𝜃𝑖𝑗 is relative rotation between beam and column,
∝𝑖 is beam rotation, 𝛽𝑗 is column rotation, ∆𝑖 is deflection
of beam, ∆𝑗 is deflection of column, 𝐿𝑖 and 𝐿𝑗 are
distances of LVDTs installed on beam and column from
connection centre, respectively. i and j are the numbers of
LVDTs installed on beam and column, respectively (See
Fig. 3).
In all of diagrams illustrated in Figs. 5 to 8, IBS
connection rotation increased with loading increase. Then,
after 66.5 kN load, the slope of load-rotation diagram was
decreased indicating the start of yielding failure in the
confirmed the first yield strain at 66.5 kN.
In conventional RC model, the connection rotation
increased by load increase until 40 kN, then a small drop of
slope was occurred and continued with constant slope until
the failure. Due to the strain obtained from mid span tensile
rebars, the yielding was started at 85.4 kN in RC model.
At first steps of loading the load-rotation diagrams of
both IBS and RC are similar. On the other hand, in all of
diagrams, the precast concrete IBS beam-to-column
connection rotated more than the monolithic RC model
connection. The difference between the beam-to-column
rotations of both IBS and RC models was grown when the
values of point loads were increased. In the other words, the
ability of the IBS frame for rotating under similar loading
was more than RC model. These results confirm the effect
of the steel end connectors’ ductility of the IBS beam. The
 A study on rotational behaviour of a new industrialised building system connection 251

Fig. 6 Load-rotation diagram of beam-to-column connection obtained from LVDT 5

Fig. 7 Load-rotation diagram of beam-to-column connection obtained from LVDT 6

load step at which the first yielding of mid span tensile (𝜃𝑦 ) of both models are illustrated in Table 3. Table 4
rebars was occurred (yield load, 𝑃𝑦 ) and their related shows the rotational ductility ratio of both models. The
rotations (𝜃𝑦 ) for both IBS and RC models are shown in results show that the IBS model is more ductile in terms of
Table 2. The ultimate load (𝑃𝑢 ) and their relevant rotations beam-to-column connection rotation than the RC model.
252 Mostafa Moghadasi, Abdul Kadir Marsono and Seyed Esmaeil Mohammadyan-Yasouj

Fig. 8 Load-rotation diagram of beam-to-column connection obtained from LVDT 8

Table 2 Yield loads and their relevant rotation of both IBS and RC Furthermore, the measured relative rotation of beam to
beam-to-column connections rotation of columns is similar whether the column is upper
𝜽𝒚 (milliradian)* or bottom one (See Figs. 5 to 7). It can be stated as:
𝑷𝒚
Model ** 𝜃4−2 ≅ 𝜃4−3 , 𝜃5−2 ≅ 𝜃5−3 and 𝜃6−2 ≅ 𝜃6−3 with acceptable
4-3 4-2 5-3 5-2 6-3 6-2 8-9 Average (kN)
approximation in both IBS and RC models. These results
IBS 10.17 11.68 9.77 11.24 9.26 10.73 8.98 10.26 66.5 are consistent with the theory of the structures for the shape
RC 8.68 9.21 8.97 9.49 8.34 8.68 7.95 8.76 85.4 of the deflections of H-subframes after application of the
loads.
*𝜃𝑦 is average of beam-to-column connection rotation at yield However, the joint rotation stiffness of RC model was
loads obtained from LVDTs; **𝑃𝑦 is yield load more than the IBS in all steps of loading. In addition, the
RC model rotational stiffness variation was less than the
IBS in all of the load-rotation diagrams.
Table 3 Ultimate loads and their relevant rotation of both IBS and
RC beam-to-column connections 3.2 Rigidity ratio (Rotational stiffness)
*
𝜽𝒚 (milliradian) 𝑷𝒚
Model ** The IBS beam-to-column connection used in this
4-3 4-2 5-3 5-2 6-3 6-2 8-9 Average (kN) experimental study is a semi-rigid connection. One of the
IBS 28.69 30.35 31.20 32.76 31.84 33.51 27.18 30.79 102 important characteristics of a semi-rigid beam-to-column
RC 13.30 15.05 12.87 14.79 12.37 14.30 12.48 13.59 99.5 connection is Ratio of Rigidity (Rotational Stiffness) in
uncracked elastic zone. The rigidity ratio of a connection
*𝜃𝑦 is average of beam-to-column connection rotation at yield affects the analysis and design of the frame and
loads obtained from LVDTs; **𝑃𝑢 is ultimate load consequently the whole 3D structure by its influences on
distribution of moment and forces between the beam and
columns. On the other hand, Rigidity Ratio of a semi-rigid
Table 4 Rotational ductility comparison between IBS and RC beam-to-column connection R can be defined as ratio of
models beam end moment to fixed end moment
𝜽𝒚 𝜽𝒖 𝑷𝒚 𝑷𝒖 𝜽𝒖
Model 𝝁𝜽 = 𝑏𝑒𝑎𝑚 𝑒𝑛𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 (𝐵𝐸𝑀)
(milliradian) (milliradian) (kN) (kN) 𝜽𝒚 𝑅= (2)
𝑓𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑 𝑒𝑛𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 (𝐹𝐸𝑀)
IBS 10.26 30.79 66.5 102.0 3.00
RC 8.76 13.59 85.4 99.5 1.55 Due to the above definition, R varies between one and
zero for fully fixed and hinged connections, respectively. In
*𝜇𝜃 is rotational ductility ratio other words, R shows the stiffness of the beam-to-column
 A study on rotational behaviour of a new industrialised building system connection 253

Fig. 9 Load- mid span deflection of both IBS and RC models at second round of loading until 30% of predicted
failure load and unloading

Fig. 10 Load- mid span deflection of both uncracked IBS and RC models at second round of loading until 20 kN

connection. loaded H-subframes constructed with the proposed

Calculation and classification of a connection could be connections. Fig. 9 shows the load-mid span deflection of
achieved by beam-line theory in moment-rotation diagram the models obtained from LVDT 7 in second round of
or using load-mid span deflection curve of the two point loading (until 30% of predicted failure load). As it was
254 Mostafa Moghadasi, Abdul Kadir Marsono and Seyed Esmaeil Mohammadyan-Yasouj
Table 5 Mid span deflections of the models at P = 20 kN, rigidity
ratio and connection rigidity classification
∆𝒉𝒆 ∆𝒓𝒆 ∆𝒕 𝑹 column connection can transfer only 44% of fixed
Model Type of connection
(mm) (mm) (mm) (%)
IBS 2.67 0.91 1.90 44 Semi-Rigid
RC 1.80 0.87 0.92 95 Rigid
*∆ℎ𝑒 and ∆𝑟𝑒 are mid span deflection at P=20 kN
obtained from elastic structural analysis for hinged and rigid
connections, respectively. ∆𝑡 is mid span deflection obtained
from test results at P = 20 kN (See Fig. 10). 𝑅 is rigidity
ratio of beam-to-column connection
observed through the test performance, the first cracks were
appeared at 𝑃𝑐𝑟 = 20 kN in both models. In other words, it
can be concluded trustworthily that both IBS and RC
models behaved elastically until P = 20 kN.
For obtaining the Rigidity Ratio of models, the load
variation with mid span deflection of beam-to-column
connection were drawn until P = 20 kN for both IBS and
RC models at second round of loading (See Fig. 10).
Furthermore, load-deflection diagram of both models with
fully fixed (R = 1) and hinged (R = 0) beam-to-column
connections were drawn in Fig. 10 using elastic structural
analysis. Rigidity Ratio for IBS and RC models can be
calculated by interpolation between rigidity ratio and mid
span deflection obtained from test results and elastic
structural analysis of the H-subframes.
Table 5 shows R = 0.44 and 0.95 for IBS and RC
models, respectively. The results of Table 5 show that the
ratio of rigidity of RC connection is 95% confirm the
monolithic property of conventional reinforced concrete
model. Furthermore, the semi-rigid IBS connection rigidity
is about 44% of a full rigid connection.
4. Conclusions
After performance of both full-scale experimental tests
on H-subframes using the Industrialised Building System
with semi-rigid hybrid steel-concrete beam-to-column
connection (IBS model) and conventional monolithic
reinforced concrete (RC model), the following conclusions
may be drawn:
● The ultimate load capacity of H-subframe
constructed from IBS beam-to-column connection is
very close to its corresponding conventional system,
confirms the ability of the developed IBS to be an
alternative to conventional reinforced concrete
system.
● The rotational ductility of IBS beam-to-column
connection was higher than the monolithic
conventional model (RC) with the rate of 1.9. This
preference of IBS models can be employed when the
structure is designed to resist against dynamic and
seismic loads while the failure loads in both IBS and
RC models were similar.
● The rigidity ratio of the developed IBS beam-to-
column connection is 44% of a full rigid connection
and categorised as semi-rigid. In other words, it
means that the above developed IBS beam-to-
end moment from beam to the column. On the other
hand, the rigidity of RC model (95%) obtained from
test results confirms its monolithic structural
behaviour.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM) and staff of the Structure and Material
Laboratory of Civil Engineering Faculty for their assistance
in conducting the tests.
References
ACI 318 (2014), Building code requirements for structural
concrete and commentary; American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, MI, USA.
ACI-ASCE Committee 512 (1964), “Suggested design of joints
and connections in precast structural concrete”, J. Struct. Div.,
90(4), 175-190.
Bhatt, P. and Kirk, D.W. (1985), “Tests on improved beam-to-
column connections for precast concrete”, ACI Journal, 82(6),
835-843.
Cheok, G.S. and Lew, H.S. (1991), “Performance of precast
concrete beam-to-column connections subject to cyclic
loading”, PCI Journal, 36(3), 56-67.
Cheok, G.S. and Lew, H.S. (1993), “Model precast concrete beam-
to-column connections subject to cyclic loading”, PCI Journal,
38(4), 80-92.
Cheok, G.S., Stone, W.C. and Kunnath, S.K. (1998), “Seismic
response of precast concrete frames with hybrid connections”,
ACI Struct. J., 95(2), 527-539.
Dolan, C.W. and Pessiki, S.P. (1989), “Model testing of precast
concrete connections”, PCI Journal, 56(2), 85-103.
Dolan, C.W., Stanon, J.F. and Anderson, R.G. (1987), “Moment
resistant connections and simple connections”, PCI Journal,
32(2), 62-74.
Elliott, K.S. (1996), Multi-storey Precast Concrete Framed
Structures, Wiley Blackwell, London, UK.
Elliott, K.S., Davis, G., Gorgun, H. and Adlparvar, M.R. (1998),
“The stability of concrete skeletal structures”, PCI Journal,
43(2), 42-60.
Elliott, K.S., Davis, G., Ferreira, M., Gorgun, H. and Mahdi, A.A.
(2003), “Can Precast Concrete Structures Be Designed as Semi-
Rigid Frames? Part 1- The experimental evidence”, Struct. Eng.,
81(16), 14-27.
Englekrik, R.E. (1995), “Development and testing of a ductile
connector for assembling precast concrete beams and columns”,
PCI Journal, 40(2), 36-51.
Ertas, O., Ozden, S. and Ozturan, T. (2006), “Ductile connections
in precast concrete moment resisting frames”, PCI Journal,
51(3), 66-76.
Eurocode 2 (2004), Design of Concrete Structures; European
Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium.
Kamar, K.A.M., Hamid, Z.A., Azman, M.N.A. and Ahamad,
M.S.S. (2011), “Industrialized building system (IBS): Revisiting
issue of definition and classification”, Int. J. Emerg. Sci., 1(2),
120-132.
Khaloo, A.R. and Parastesh, H. (2003), “Cyclic loading of ductile
precast concrete beam-column connection”, ACI Struct. J.,
100(4), 291-296.
 A study on rotational behaviour of a new industrialised building system connection 255

Kulkarni, A.S. and Li, B. (2009), “Investigations of seismic

behaviour of hybrid connections”, PCI Journal, 54(1), 67-87.
Kulkarni, A.S., Li, B. and Yip, W.K. (2008),” Finite Element
analysis of precast hybrid-steel concrete connections under
cyclic loading”, J. Construct. Steel Res., 64(2), 190-201.
Kwong, Y.W. and Teng, S. (2000), “Hybrid precast concrete
beam”, CSE Research Bulletin, No.13, pp. 78-80.
Li, B., Kulkarni, A.S. and Leong, C.L. (2009), “Seismic perfor-
mance of precast hybrid-steel concrete connections”, J. Earthq.
Eng., 13(5), 667-689.
Loo, Y.C. and Yao, B.Z. (1995), “Static and repeated load tests on
precast concrete beam-to-column”, PCI Journal, 40(2), 106-
115.
Marsono, A.K., Ying, W.J., Md. Tap, M., Chieh, Y.C. and Haddadi,
A. (2015), “Standard Verification Test for Industrialised
Building System (IBS) Repetitive Manufacturing”, Procedia
CIRP, 26(2015), 252-257.
Moghadasi, M. and Marsono, A.K. (2012), “Comparative
experimental study of full-scale H-subframe using a new
industrialized building system and monolithic reinforced
concrete beam-to-column connection”, Struct. Des. Tall Special
Build., 23(8), 563-579.
Pillai, S.U. and Kirk, D.W. (1981), “Ductile beam-column
connection in precast concrete”, ACI Journal, 78(6) 480-487.
Rahman, A.B.A., Hock, L.J., Saim, A.A. and Osman, M.H. (2007),
“Design and testing of a full scale precast concrete h-subframe”,
Proceedings of the 1st Construction Industry Research
Achievement International Conference (CIRAC2007), Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, March.
Seckin, M. and Fu, H.C. (1990), “Beam-column connections in
precast reinforced concrete construction”, ACI Structural
Journal, 87(3), 252-261.
Stone, W.C., Cheok, G.S. and Stanton, J.F. (1995), “Performance
of hybrid moment-resisting precast beam-column concrete
connections subjected to cyclic loading”, ACI Structural
Journal, 92(2), 229-249.
Wilden, H. (Ed.) (2010), PCI Design Handbook Precast and
Prestressed Concrete, (7th Ed.), Precast/Prestressed Concrete
Institute (PCI), Chicago, IL, USA.
Wilson, E.L. and Habibullah, A. (2009), SAP2000 Integrated
Finite Element Analysis and Design of Structures, Version
14.1.0; Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, CA, USA.
Yang, K.H., Oh, M.H., Kim, M.H. and Lee, H.C. (2010), “Flexural
behaviour of hybrid precast concrete beams with H-steel beams
at both ends”, Eng. Struct., 32(9), 2940-2949.

CC

View publication stats