Experimental and Nonlinear Numerical Analysis of Precast

Concrete Column Splices with High-Yield Metal Plates

J. D. Nzabonimpa 1 and Won-Kee Hong 2

Abstract: The aim of this study was to present the use of detachable laminated high-yield metal plates for precast concrete column splices.
The structural behavior of precast concrete column connections with detachable high-yield-strength (650-MPa) plates with 1,000-MPa high-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

strength bolts was performed experimentally and numerically. A nonlinear numerical model based on concrete damaged plasticity was de-
veloped to evaluate the structural performance of the novel joint for precast concrete columns with fully restrained and partially restrained
moment connections. The behavior of the proposed joint obtained numerically was in good agreement with the full-scale test data, offering
accurate prediction of stresses and strains for the design of the mechanical column connections. Finally, the real-world behavior including
strain evolution of the mechanical joints was understood by the strains of microscopic level obtained via the proposed numerical model. This
study is expected to contribute to promoting the use of plates with high-yield strength, which possess the merits of bolted column-to-column
splices, to implement mechanical joints in precast concrete assembly similar to how steel frames are assembled. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)
ST.1943-541X.0002233. © 2018 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: High-strength steel; High-strength bolts; Moment resisting column-column connection; Reinforced concrete precast
frames; Extended end plates; Finite-element analysis; Detachable mechanical column joints; Detachable laminated plates.

Introduction performance under various types of loadings. Conventional bolted

Research Background
Precast concrete structure is an assemblage of prefabricated mem-
bers, which, when jointed together, form a three-dimensional
framework (office buildings, parking lots, schools) that is able
to resist gravity, wind, and seismic loads. For the past years, the
construction industry adopted the use of precast members over
the conventional cast-in-place monolithic methods. Precast con-
crete members offered many advantages including reduction of
the construction period, cost-efficiency, high-quality control, fast
and accurate erection of members, and environmental protection.
Each connection must demonstrate the strength to withstand any
type of load during its lifetime. A great deal of research has been
performed to upgrade the application of precast concrete members.
Some of these studies were carried out to investigate the erection
and installation process of precast frames. A study conducted by
Proverbs et al. (1998) suggested that the lifting and installation
of precast frames have a significant impact on the construction
period. Alternatively, Elliott (2016) detailed a wide range of
connection types that were proposed to assemble prefabricated
concrete components. It was concluded that the joint design for
precast members should comply with applicable building codes
and their structural safety should always be ensured. Among the
detailed connections, some connections were classified as pin,
semirigid, and rigid categories, depending on their structural
1
Postdoctoral Fellow, Dept. of Architectural Engineering, Kyung Hee
Univ., Yongin 446-701, Korea.
2
Professor, Dept. of Architectural Engineering, Kyung Hee Univ.,
Yongin 446-701, Korea (corresponding author). Email: hongwk@khu
.ac.kr
Note. This manuscript was submitted on June 28, 2017; approved on
June 25, 2018; published online on December 10, 2018. Discussion per-
iod open until May 10, 2019; separate discussions must be submitted for
individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engi-
neering, © ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445.
beam-to-column and column-to-column connections have been in
use since the mid-1950s for transferring internal forces between
interconnected components of structural steelworks. In most cases,
the bolts in these structures were subjected to both shear and ten-
sion. In steelworks, loads exerted on the two parts of steel columns
and beams, connected with either end-plates or cover plates, were
transferred by bolted end plates. Numerous related studies have
been conducted, including Díaz et al. (2011) and Maggi et al.
(2005), whose studies developed finite-element models of beam-
to-column joints with extended end-plate joints and the parametric
analysis of steel bolted end plates. Ju et al. (2004) and Saberi et al.
(2014) also performed three-dimensional finite-element studies to
explore the structural behaviors of steel bolted connections along
with a comparison of bolted end-plate and T-stub connection sen-
sitivities to component thickness. Bahaari and Sherbourne (2000),
Bursi and Jaspart (1998), and Heinisuo et al. (2010) performed the
finite-element simulation of extended end-plate connections to pro-
vide design procedures of end-plate connections with Grade
eight-bolts.
Objectives and Motivations
Constructing steel frames is relatively expensive compared with
precast construction, and the frame must be also protected from
fire, which entails additional cost because no additional expense
for fireproofing precast frames is required. This study was also mo-
tivated by the drawbacks of existing fabrications of precast concrete
frames and the merits of bolted column-to-column connections to
implement mechanical joints in precast concrete assembly. The au-
thors provided column-to-column mechanical connections of high-
yield strength for concrete precast members to replace steel frames
without compensating both structural capability and constructabil-
ity. The concrete was used for both structural components and fire-
proofing materials, rendering the composite structural system more
applicable. The use of precast frames with mechanical connections
allowed rapid erection by using conventional beam-to-column

© ASCE 04018254-1 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

 joints of steel frames. A numerical analysis exploring the structural
behavior of a mechanical joint using high-yield metal plates was
presented to promote the use of the proposed connection, contrib-
uting to fabricating concrete frames similar to how steel frames are
assembled. This study was also devoted to exploring microscopic
strains by identifying the numerical parameters of the concrete
damaged plasticity model to derive the strain evolution of the
laminated metal joints.
Research Significance
out due to excessive bearing forces. The beam shear forces must
be also resisted by bolts located in the compression side according
to Eq. (1). One side of the mechanical joint should resist compres-
sion forces, whereas the other side must withstand tensile forces
acting on the metal plates
V u ≤ φV n;bolt ð1Þ
The number and locations of high-strength bolts required to
resist tensile forces are calculated according to Eq. (2)
M t ≤ φM n;bolt ð2Þ

Contributions where Mt = required moment demand determined on the basis of

the strain with respect to the neutral axis of the laminated metal,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The conventional column-to-column connections using grout denoting the moment acting on tensile reinforcing bars.
sleeves were common in traditional construction of precast frames
(Guan et al. 2016). Such traditional connections required concrete
pour forms to cast the concrete at joints, the preparation of which Formulation for Plate Thickness
required significant labor at the construction site. In earlier studies The design equations to determine tensile loads exerted on the
(Hu et al. 2017; Nzabonimpa et al. 2017, 2018; Nzabonimpa and splicing plates shown in Fig. 1 for Specimens C1 and C2 were
Hong 2018), laminated column plates with conventional yield- derived from the strain compatibility. Concrete components with
strength metal were reported to provide moment connections for rebars are spliced by the plates that are interconnected by high-
the column-to-column joint assembly. In the present study, the strength bolts shown in Table 1. The loads exerted on the column
precast-concrete-based mechanical column joints with high- plates were calculated according to the elastoplastic rebars in both
yield-strength metal plates were developed and tested to calibrate compression and tensile zones. In Fig. 2, neutral axis and corre-
numerical parameters. The experimental and numerical studies of sponding force components at the design load limit with profile
precast concrete column connections using metal plates and bolts of of strains and stresses are demonstrated for the calculation of
high-yield strength were also provided. Complex stress-strain the loads applied to column plates.
relationships of mechanical joints with laminated plates were very
difficult to measure via experiments. Extensive numerical and ex- Derivation of the Equations Based on Strain
perimental investigations were undertaken to verify the structural Compatibility
performance of the proposed connection and critical parameters
influencing the stiffness of the joint. A coupling between damage The equilibrium equations are given in Eqs. (3) and (4), in which
and plasticity characterized stiffness degradation, inelastic defor- the neutral axis, c, is calculated
mations, and the failure mechanics of concrete in tension and in
compression. The nonlinear finite-element analysis based on dam-
aged plasticity model for concrete was performed to predict the
structural behavior of the proposed mechanical joints including re-
quired plate thickness having high-yield strength. For the proposed
mechanical column joints, equations for steel frame connections
introduced by AISC (2005) were limited in their use to determine
the thickness of metal plate and number and locations of bearing-
type-based bolts because the composite structural behavior of the
joint with the concrete should be understood. Conventional bolted
beam-to-column and column-to-column connections used in struc-
tural steelworks for transferring internal forces between intercon-
nected components were modified for the precast frames.

Design and Fabrication of the Specimens with Test

Results

Bolts Design
According to the AISC design guidelines, the design equations Fig. 1. Test specimens of RC section with splicing column plates.
were provided to determine the required bolts and their positions
for column plates subjected to axial loads and moments (Hu et al.
2017). In this study, finite-element analysis (FEA) of damaged Table 1. Material properties
concrete plasticity was performed to design test specimens for
Material Property
mechanical joints. The thicknesses of plate with high-yield strength
and appropriate number and locations of bolts based on bearing- Concrete f c0 (compressive strength) = 33 MPa
type connections were determined. The metal plates for the joint Rebar (HD25) f y (yield strength) = 600 MPa
were designed to resist tensile forces calculated from the required Metal plate Fy (yield strength) = 650 MPa
moment demand exerting onto the plates. Shear/bearing forces Bolt (M22-F10T) Fyb (yield strength) = 900 MPa
Stirrup (HD10) f y (yield strength) = 400 MPa
were also explored to ensure that plate elements were not torn

© ASCE 04018254-2 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

 B

cm = 0.003
γc
Fr1 c
r1 CC
C Neutral axis
T Fr2

D
r2

Fr3
r3
Rebar Concrete
Strain compatibility Internal force contribution

Fig. 2. Neutral axis and corresponding force components at the design load limit with profile of strains and stresses.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Faxial ðzero when there is no axial loadsÞ þ Cc þ FRcomp: ¼ FRtension

ð3Þ

or

Faxial ¼ FRtension − Cc − FRcomp: ð4Þ

where the internal forces contributed by the structural components

of the section are shown as follows:

c − d1
FRcomp: ¼ Ar1 × Er × εcm × ð5Þ
c

d2 − c
FRtension ¼ Ar2 × Er × εcm × þ Ar3 × f yR ð6Þ
c

Cc ¼ α × c × B × f c0 ð7Þ

The compressive forces of concrete, Cc , is obtained, in which

the mean stress factors α are obtained by
R εcm
f dε
α¼ 0 0 c c ð8Þ
f c εcm

The centroid factors γ are given as

R εcm
ε f dε
γ ¼ 1 − 0 R εcmc c c ð9Þ
εcm 0 fc dεc

The nominal moment strength at the design load limit state is

then obtained using Eq. (10)
M nominal ¼ M R=centroid − M Conc=centroid
where the flexural moment capacities provided by the structural
components, with respect to the centroid, are shown as follows:
d2 − c
M R=centroid ¼ Ar2 × Er × εcm × × ðd2 − dc Þ þ Ar3 × f yR
c design of plates for Specimens C1 and C2 was performed accord-
c − d1
× ðd3 − dc Þ − Ar1 × Er × εcm × × ðd1 − dc Þ
c
ð11Þ
M Conc=centroid ¼ α × c × B × f c0 × ðγ × c − dc Þ
The loads applied to column plates are calculated in
Eqs. (5)–(7).
The calculation procedure is summarized in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Computing algorithm determining internal loads.
ð10Þ
Design of Plates Subjected to the Tensile Forces
From Eqs. (5) and (6), the tensile force of the first layer (top) and
the second layer (middle) were calculated as 883.12 and 226.88 kN,
respectively. The total tensile force (PTension ) is then 1,110 kN. The
ing to AISC (2015, pp. 9–10)and Steel Design Guide 24 (Packer
et al. 2010). A number of bolts in tension (n), b 0 , and p were 9, 89,
and 100 mm, respectively. Table 1 presents material properties used
in the design of the specimen. Using Eq. (13), a plate thickness of
27 mm and the locations of the bolts were determined as shown in
ð12Þ Fig. 1
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
4.44ðPu =nÞb 0
tp ≥ tmin ¼ ¼ 27 mm ð13Þ
pFyp

© ASCE 04018254-3 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

 The finite-element analysis provided plate thickness close to
that calculated by using Eq. (13). The thickness of 26 mm was used
in the test. The design of the plates splicing concrete column com-
ponents can be carried out via a MATLAB-based design procedure
presented in this section. Manual calculations are also possible
using Eqs. (3)–(12).
Fabrication of Test Specimens
Fig. 4 presents the instrumented specimen and test setup for the ap-
plication of a load at 1.5 m from the base. Table 2 lists the geometric
details used in the experimental and numerical investigations of the
three specimens. Half of the column was modeled at the contra-
flexural point in the middle of the column under the lateral load.

Mechanical joint with Mechanical joint

without headed studs Monolithic column
headed studs

Rebar
Headed
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

stud

Joint level

Plate Bolt

< C1 > < C2 > < C3 >

*C1~C2: Plate (500 x 500 x 26, mm)
-Yield strength: 650 MPa
Load
*C1~C2: Bolts (M-22-F10T)

1158 mm

1500 mm
*C1~C3: Re-bars: HD25
-Yield strength: 600 MPa

* C1 : Headed stud: M13 (L= 80 mm) 342 mm

-Yield strength: 400 MPa

*Concrete: compressive strength

(33.1 MPa)
Foundation: 2000 x 2000 x 500, unit: mm
Column size: 300 x 300, unit: mm
(a)

Upper plate Upper

plate Bolt

Lower plate Bolt Lower plate

Gauges

(b) (c)

Gauges

(d)

Fig. 4. Tested specimens: (a) description of tested specimens; (b) C1; (c) C2; and (d) C3.

© ASCE 04018254-4 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

 Table 2. Material properties of Specimens C1, C2, and C3
Specimen (plate thickness) Connection of rebars to the plates Deformation Material Size Material property
C1 (two 26-mm plates) Embedded nut No deformation Concrete 300 × 300 (mm) fc0 ¼ 33.1 MPa εc ¼ 0.003
Rebar HD-25 Fy ¼ 600 MPa εy ¼ 0.003
Plate 500 × 500 (mm) Fy ¼ 650 MPa εy ¼ 0.00325
Bolt M22-F10T Fu ¼ 1,000 MPa εy ¼ 0.0045
Stud M13 Fy ¼ 400 MPa εy ¼ 0.002
C2 (two 26-mm plates) Embedded nut No deformation Concrete 300 × 300 (mm) fc0 ¼ 33.1 MPa εc ¼ 0.003
Rebar HD-25 Fy ¼ 600 MPa εy ¼ 0.003
Plate 500 × 500 (mm) Fy ¼ 650 MPa εy ¼ 0.00325
Bolt M22-F10T Fu ¼ 1,000 MPa εy ¼ 0.0045
C3 No plates: monolithic specimen — Concrete 300 × 300 (mm) fc0 ¼ 33.1 MPa εc ¼ 0.003
Rebar HD-25 Fy ¼ 600 MPa εy ¼ 0.003
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. Cyclic displacement-controlled loading protocol [based on FEMA (2000) loading protocol].

Vertical rebars were anchored by nuts, which were then located in
counterbores prepared in the column plates. The flexural strength of
the column plates was determined to resist tension exerted by rebars
and contribute to the stability of the column joints. A displacement-
controlled cyclic loading protocol (based on FEMA-SAC loading
protocol) was applied to the specimens, as described in Fig. 5.
The plate joints were validated by breaking three precast test spec-
imens, including a precast conventional monolithic specimen as
shown in Fig. 6. Column plates that were 26 mm thick were installed
for Specimens C1 and C2, whereas Specimen C3 was a monolithic
cast-in-place concrete specimen fabricated without plates. Specimen
C1 had headed studs to study the influence of studs on the flexural
resisting capacity of the cold joints between steel plates and concrete,
whereas Specimen C2 did not use headed studs. The behavior of all
elements including steel sections, rebars, bolts, nuts, and plates
(SM490, f y ¼ 325 MPa), was modeled as linear elastic–bilinear
plastic elements, whereas high-strength plates (HSA800, fy ¼
650 MPa) were modeled as linear elastic–multilinear plastic ele-
ments. The von Mises yield surface was used for all of these com-
ponents with kinematic hardening in cyclic behavior. Table 2
presents the material properties of specimens, including the yield
strength of column plates, connecting bolts, and rebars. The proper-
ties are presented for experimental and nonlinear numerical
investigations.
Experimental Overview
The flexural capacity of Specimen C1 with headed studs, shown in
Fig. 6(a), was compared with that of Specimen C2 in Fig. 7(a), in
which headed studs were not installed. The maximum flexural
resisting capacity of 115.5 kN (−119.4 kN) at a stroke of
60 mm (−57.5 mm) measured for Specimen C1 [Fig. 6(a)] was
similar to the maximum load of 118.2 kN (−120.2 kN) at a stroke
of 65.4 mm (−60 mm) measured for Specimen C2 [Fig. 7(a)]. This
implied that headed studs can be omitted because the rebar in both
test specimens provides sufficient shear capacity between the two
cold joints. The proposed column joints of Specimens C1 and
C2 have transferred tension from the rebar to the column plates
with no damage to the plates and nuts, as shown in Figs. 6(d)
and 7(c). These figures show no noticeable deformation in either
plate after the test, indicating that the plate stiffness was sufficient
to transfer moments at joints. In addition, the influence of the stiff-
ness of metal plates installed in Specimens C1 and C2 on the strain-
stroke relationship up to the concrete strain of 0.003 was similar, as
shown in Figs. 13(c and d). This indicated that the stresses and rates
of strain increase for the mechanical joints were similar to one
another regardless of inclusion of headed studs.
Test Results
Specimen C1
The onset of tensile cracking occurred at a stroke of 7 mm from the
interface between the upper plate and concrete column in Specimen
C1. The crack width was measured as 0.3–0.4 mm at a stroke of
15 mm and a load of 39 kN. The width of tensile cracks increased to
2 mm at a stroke of 45 mm and a load of 100 kN. A rapid load
reduction accompanied by a loud sound was observed after

© ASCE 04018254-5 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

 Moment: 96.6 KN.m Moment: 95.6 KN.m
Displacement: 27.7 mm Displacement: 29.4 mm
Concrete strain: 0.00805 (2.7 ) Concrete strain: 0.00813 (2.7 )
Rebar strain: 0.00336 (1.1 ) Rebar strain: 0.00307 (1.0 )
Upper Plate: 0.00236 (0.7 ) Upper Plate: 0.00339 (2.1 )
Lower Plate: 0.00178 (0.5 ) Lower Plate: 0.00251(1.6 )
Moment: 76.0 KN.m Headed Stud: 0.0009 (0.5 ) Headed Stud: 0.0009 (0.5 )
Displacement: 19.8 mm
Concrete strain: 0.00302(1.0 )
Rebar strain: 0.00233 (0.8 )
Upper Plate: 0.00172 (0.5 )
Lower Plate: 0.00133 (0.4 )
Headed Stud: 0.00075 (0.4 )
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Moment: 74.6 KN.m

Displacement: 19.6 mm
Concrete strain: 0.00299(1.0 )
Rebar strain: 0.00219 (0.7 )
Upper Plate: 0.00196 (1.2 )
Lower Plate: 0.00147 (0.9 )
Headed Stud: 0.00075 (0.4 )

(a)

(b) (c)

(d) (e)

Fig. 6. Failure modes for Specimen C1: (a) monotonic load-displacement relationships; full damage and dilation angle of 30°; embedded model;
(b) cyclic load-displacement relationships; full damage and dilation angle of 30° and viscosity of 0.003; (c) premature fracture of concrete below the
metal plate; loud sounds heard at a stroke of 60 mm and a load of 180 kN; (d) final plate deformation; no deformation observed in either plate or nuts;
and (e) final plate deformation; no deformation observed in either plate or nuts.

compression failure of the concrete column below the plates at a shows no deformation in either plate after the test, indicating that
stroke of 60 mm and a load of 108 kN (or at a stroke of the plate stiffness was sufficient to transfer loads at joint. The tested
−60 mm and a load of −116 kN in the other direction), and a con- specimens with mechanical joints were disassembled as shown in
crete strain of 0.00684 was measured, as shown in Fig. 6(c). Fig. 6(d) Fig. 6(d) to examine the plate deformation and bolts damages.

© ASCE 04018254-6 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(a)

(b) (c)

Fig. 7. Failure modes for Specimen C2: (a) comparison of experimental and numerical investigations (full damage and dilation angle of 30°);
influence of axial loads; (b) premature fracture of concrete below the metal plate; loud sounds heard at a stroke of 70 mm and a load of
118 kN; and (c) final plate deformation; no deformation observed in either plate or nuts.

Nuts were undamaged, having transferred tension from the rebar to
the column plates. Fig. 6(e) shows that the headed studs installed in
Specimen C1 were also undamaged, suggesting that headed studs
that were provided between construction joints were unnecessary.
The rebar alone provided enough shear resistance at the cold joints
between steel plates and concrete.
Specimen C2
Initial cracks that were 0.3–0.4 mm wide occurred between the
upper plate and concrete at a stroke of 15 mm and a load of
44 kN, which then increased to 0.6 mm at a stroke of 30 mm
and a load of 70 kN. These cracks propagated to 0.8 mm at a stroke
of 45 mm and a load of 97 kN. The crack width further opened to
1.2 mm at a stroke of 60 mm and a load of 115 kN, followed by a
rapid load reduction accompanied by a loud sound at a stroke of
70 mm and a load of 118 kN, as illustrated in Fig. 7(b). Crack
widths of 8 mm were observed at the end of the test. Fig. 7(c) shows
that the nuts were undamaged, enabling tension to be transmitted to
the column plates. Fig. 7(c) also shows no deformation in either
plate, indicating that the plate stiffness was sufficient to transfer
loads at joint. No noticeable plate deformation was found due to
the sufficient plate stiffness in both Specimens C1 and C2. The
flexural capacity of Specimen C1 with headed studs was compared
with that of Specimen C2, in which headed studs were not installed.
The flexural resisting capacity was not influenced by headed studs
because the rebar in both test specimens provided sufficient shear
capacity between the two cold joints.
Specimen C3
Specimen C3 was a monolithic cast-in-place column fabricated
without column plates. A maximum load capacity of 120.1 kN
at a stroke of 38.8 mm was demonstrated, as depicted in
Fig. 8(a). The test was terminated with compressive failure modes
observed at a stroke of 60 mm. In Fig. 8(a), numerical load-
displacement relationships, plotted up to a stroke of 60 mm corre-
sponding to a concrete strain of 0.01 without considering a damage
variable, matched well with the test data. The failure mode and
strain data observed in experiments suggested the use of damaged

© ASCE 04018254-7 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254


(a)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 8. Experimental and numerical investigations under monotonic and cyclic loads; monolithic column (C3): (a) comparison of experimental and
numerical investigations for monotonic loads (dilation angle of 30°); and (b) comparison of experimental and numerical investigations; cyclic with
kinematic hardening.
plasticity model with confined stress-strain relationship in the
region where concrete degradation was expected.
Nonlinear Finite-Element Modeling Techniques
Finite-Element Modeling Description and Calibration of
the Nonlinear Numerical Parameters
Specimens C1 and C2 were a precast column with a mechanical
joint, and Specimen C3 was a cast-in-place column constructed
as a monolithic specimen. The column, foundation, rebars, and stir-
rups of Specimens C1 and C2 were modeled similarly to those of
Specimen C3. Figs. 9(a–c) show finite-element meshes with
element types for the Specimens C1, C2, and C3. The details of
contact elements are described in Figs. 9(d and e), illustrating
the selected surface-to-surface details and indicating contacts that
were established by master and slave surfaces. The numbers of el-
ements used in Specimens C1 and C2 were 47,975 and 46,815,
respectively. Boundary conditions were specified for the symmetry
plane by restraining the displacement degree of freedom (DOF) in
the normal direction (U2) of the plane. All of the displacement de-
grees of freedom were restrained at the sides and bottom of the
foundation to simulate fixed support.
Monolithic Column: Specimen C3
In Fig. 8(a), the load-displacement relationships obtained by
numerical models with embedded, tie, cohesive, and slip effects
are compared for a dilation angle of 30°. The nonlinear models,
except for the one with slip effects, provided load-displacement re-
lationships similar to those of the test data when damage variables
were not considered, as shown in the monolithic runs designated by
Legends 2, 3, and 4 in Fig. 8(a). In Fig. 8(b), the flexural capacity
provided by the cyclic kinematic model with the slip effect of the
rebars yielded a load-displacement relationship that is smaller than
that of the test data based on the cohesive and embedded models.
For the Specimen C3, cyclic behaviors implementing kinematic
hardening behavior were predicted well up to the 30 mm corre-
sponding to the concrete strain of 0.0095, as shown in Fig. 8(b).
The hysteretic evaluation of the precast column with the mechani-
cal joints was accurate for the design defined at a concrete strain of
up to 0.0095. However, beyond a stroke of 30 mm, the area under
the hysteretic loop did not match the test data because the softening
© ASCE 04018254-8
J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254
Specimen C3: Load-displacement curve
150
125 1. Test data
100
75
50 2. FEA model (Rebar:
Embedded - Kinematic
25 hardening, Concrete: 33 MPa-
Load (kN)
Full damage)
0
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 3. FEA model-Cyclic-Cohesive -
-25
No damage
-50
-75
4. FEA model-Cyclic -Slip
-100 (Elastic slip: 0.1 mm, friction
coefficient= 0.45, bond stress=
-125 20 MPa), No damage
-150
(b)
Displacement (mm)
and pinching effects were not well treated in the numerical analysis
with the ABAQUS element C3D8R (Dassault Systèmes Simulia
2014). Wan et al. (2001) presented a similar conclusion. They
stated that it was quite difficult to model the pinching effect of con-
crete during cyclic loading using ABAQUS in the region with large
deflections. Similar findings were also shown by Ali et al. (2013),
indicating that hysteresis loops obtained in their investigations by
FEA (ABAQUS) did not present pinching effects. However, flexu-
ral strengths were similar to those calculated monotonically. The
finite-element analysis provided monotonic load-displacement re-
lationships representing an envelope of hysteretic response similar
to those of the experimental investigation for entire deflections
shown in Figs. 6(a), 7(a), and 8(a). It is recommended to use a cus-
tomized hysteresis model or a user-defined stress-strain relation-
ship for cyclic behavior when the pinching effect of concrete in
cyclic loading is to be explored in ABAQUS.
Columns with Mechanical Joints: Specimens
C1 and C2
Specimen C1 was designed with joint plates and headed studs to
form a fully or partially restrained moment connection. Nominal
moment capacity was estimated when average compressive strains
of concrete meshes reached 0.003. Dilation angles similar to those
used for Specimen C3 were suggested to represent the behavior of
Specimen C1. Numerical load-displacement relationships plotted
up to a stroke of 60 mm, corresponding to a concrete strain of
0.021 with full damage, matched well with the experimental test
data, as shown in Fig. 6(a), based on an embedded model. The best
fit was found with a dilation angle of 30° with a full damage var-
iable (damage factor of 0.8), as presented in the load-deflection
relationships of Legends 1 and 2 for a specimen with a high-
yield-strength plate (HSA 800, 650 MPa), as shown in Fig. 6(a).
Flexural capacity with plates having a yield strength of 325 MPa
(SM490) and 100% damage was shown with load-deflection rela-
tionships of Legend 3, demonstrating a flexural capacity similar to
that of a high-yield-strength plate (HSA 800, 650 MPa). In Fig. 6(b),
the hysteresis cycles of Specimen C1 numerically obtained are com-
pared with the test data with full damage and dilation angle of 30°.
The maximum numerical forces in each cycle agreed well with their
corresponding experimental load up to the cycles with a stroke of
60 mm at which sudden concrete fracture occurred with a loud noise,
as shown in Fig. 6(c). The numerical instability initiated due to the
J. Struct. Eng.
 (a) (b) (c)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(d)

(e)

Fig. 9. Element description for numerical analysis: (a) C1; (b) C2; (c) C3; (d) location of contact elements for C1; and (e) surface-to-surface
contact details.

© ASCE 04018254-9 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

 cracking and crushing of concrete when a damage factor of 0.8 and a
viscosity of 0.003 were implemented, leading to the convergence
failure at 60 mm. The convergence was improved with a damage
factor of 0.7 and a viscosity of 0.004; however, the flexural strength
was overestimated. The failure mode and strain data observed in
Specimen C2 also suggested that the analysis needed a damage var-
iable. For Column C2 under monotonic loads, the numerical load-
displacement relationship was plotted up to a concrete strain of
0.0197 with a full damage variable and a dilation angle of 30°. They
matched well with the test data, as depicted in the curve of Legend 2
in Fig. 7(a) based on an embedded model. In Fig. 7(a), the influence
of axial loads on flexural strength is elucidated. The flexural strength
of Column C2 with both 30% (Legend 3) and 60% (Legend 4) of
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
nominal axial strength of the columns was larger than that of the
column without axial loads (Legend 2). The flexural capacity in-
creased when the column was under compression with axial loads,
indicating that the column plates transferred axial loads and mo-
ments. However, greater ductility was demonstrated with less axial
loads. At the compressive strain of 0.008, flexural moment strengths
of 196, 126, and 91.1 kN·m were observed by columns with 60%,
30%, and 0% axial loads, as shown by Legends 4, 3, and 2, respec-
tively. In addition, columns spliced by plates exhibited stable perfor-
mance up to deformations of 20, 23.3, and 26.4 mm for 60%, 30%,
and 0% axial loads, respectively.
Parameters Defined for the Proposed Mechanical Joint
(Specimens C1, C2, and C3)
In the present work, the finite-element (FE) parameters were de-
fined on the basis of concrete-damaged plasticity model to study
the structural behavior of the mechanical connections splicing pre-
cast concrete columns. The results obtained from the calibrated FE
models under monotonic loads matched well with the test data
when a dilation angle of 30° was used [Figs. 6(a), 7(a), and 8(a)].
The FE models experienced converging difficulties due to the for-
mation of concrete cracks, leading to premature termination of the
analyses. This problem can be overcome by increasing viscosity
parameters (from 0.004 to 0.005 in this study) to improve the rate
of convergence during the cyclic analysis, not compromising the
Fig. 10. Influence of the location of column plate on the flexural capacity of the specimens with dilation angle of 30°.
© ASCE 04018254-10
J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254
FE results. Convergence can be also improved by decreasing dam-
age index.
Influence of High-Yield Metal Plates on the Flexural
Capacity
Influence of the Yield Strength of Metal Plates on the
Flexural Capacity of the Proposed Connection for
Specimen C1
The load-displacement relationships of all specimens are presented
in Fig. 10, which shows the influence of the yield strength of metal
plates on the flexural capacity. Fig. 11 presents maximum plastic
strains and von Mises stresses of laminated plates with 650- and
325-MPa yield strengths for Specimens C1 and C1-1 at concrete
strains of 0.003 and 0.008, indicating that larger plastic strains
(0.0034 and 0.0064, respectively) were observed for the plates with
325-MPa yield strength. Plates with 325 MPa yield strength were in
a plastic region at strains of 0.003 and 0.008, whereas those with
650 MPa were elastic. The numerical data were calibrated to the
test data at the microscopic level to attain the real-world behavior
of the proposed column joints (Table 3). The influence of the metal
plates with high-yield strength (650 MPa) on the flexural capacity
of the proposed connection [Fig. 12(a)] was compared with that
of the metal plates with a yield strength of 325 MPa [Fig. 12(b)]
when the strains of the columns reached 0.003. For the plates with a
650-MPa yield strength, the flexural capacity (63.3 kN, moment of
76.0 kN·m) increased by 1.8% relative to the metal plate with a
325-MPa yield strength, which can resist a lateral load of
62.2 kN and a moment of 74.6 kN·m. The differences of stress-
strain relationships between Specimens C1 (yield strength of
650 MPa) and C1-1 (yield strength of 325 MPa) were not notice-
able, as indicated by the curves represented by Legends 2 and 3 in
Fig. 6(a). This implied that the influence of the yield-strength of the
column plates on the strains of concrete, rebars, headed studs, and
bolts connecting column plates was insignificant at the concrete
strain of 0.003, as shown in Fig. 12 and Table 3, in which numerical
results of Specimen C1-1 are presented. The selection of yield
strength did not affect the flexural strength of the column with
J. Struct. Eng.
 Fig. 11. Maximum plastic strains and von Mises stresses of the plates for Specimens C1 (650 MPa) and C1-1 (325 MPa) at concrete strains of 0.003
and 0.008: (a) stress-strain relationship for steel at concrete strain of 0.003; and (b) stress-strain relationship of steel at concrete strain of 0.008.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Table 3. Strains and stresses of the mechanical joints for the yield strength of metal plates with 650 and 325 MPa at the concrete strains of 0.003
[Figs. 6(a) and 7(a)]
Numerical values
Specimen Material Strain Stress Test data strain
C1 (with studs, HSA800 plate) (Fy ¼ 650 MPa) Concrete (allowable design strain, εc ¼ 0.003) 0.00302 (εc ) 30.6 0.00297 (εc )
Rebar (εy ¼ 0.003) 0.00233 (0.78εy ) 498.2 0.00269 (0.9εy )
Upper plate (εy ¼ 0.00325) 0.00172 (0.53εy ) 349.6 0.00162 (0.5εy )
Lower plate (εy ¼ 0.00325) 0.00133 (0.41εy ) 279.1 0.00121 (0.4εy )
Bolt (εy ¼ 0.0045) 0.00301 (0.67εy ) 618.0 N/A
Headed studs (εy ¼ 0.002) 0.000749 (0.37εy ) 167.1 0.000630 (0.3εy )
C1-1 (with studs, SM490 plate) (Fy ¼ 325 MPa) Concrete (allowable design strain, εc ¼ 0.003) 0.00299 (εc ) 30.4 N/A
Rebar (εy ¼ 0.003) 0.00219 (0.73εy ) 465.6 N/A
Upper plate (εy ¼ 0.00159) 0.00196 (1.236εy ) 237.9 N/A
Lower plate (εy ¼ 0.00159) 0.00147 (0.92εy ) 244.2 N/A
Bolt (εy ¼ 0.0045) 0.00299 (0.66εy ) 614.4 N/A
Headed studs (εy ¼ 0.002) 0.000755 (0.38εy ) 167.5 N/A
C2 (without studs, HSA800 plate) (Fy ¼ 650 MPa) Concrete (allowable design strain, εc ¼ 0.003) 0.00301 (εc ) 30.4 0.00300 (εc )
Rebar (εy ¼ 0.003) 0.00256 (0.85εy ) 30.7 0.00259 (0.9εy )
Upper plate (εy ¼ 0.00325) 0.00178 (0.55εy ) 358.5 —
Lower plate (εy ¼ 0.00325) 0.00138 (0.43εy ) 286.5 0.00132 (0.41εy )
Bolt (εy ¼ 0.0045) 0.00289 (0.64εy ) 593.9 N/A

mechanical plate joints at a concrete strain of around 0.003; in this
case, the contribution of the column plates was more controlled by
their thickness. In Figs. 13(c and d), the concrete strain of 0.003 is
marked and rates of strain increase are exhibited with respect to the
yield strength of the metal plates. Figs. 13(c and d) show that the
rates of strain increase relative to stroke of specimens having plates
with 650-MPa yield strength were similar to those having plates
with a yield strength of 325 MPa at a stroke of 20 mm. However,
the strain of plates with a yield strength of 325 MPa increased rap-
idly from a stroke of 20 mm while the plates with high-yield
strength prevented the rate of strain increase from rising, thereby
allowing the activation of structural elements attached to plates as
exhibited in Figs. 13(a and b) at large strokes. The stress activation of
structural elements attached to the column plates [Figs. 13(a and b)]
became retarded with limited flexural strength when the deflections
of the specimens reached 20 mm. Laminated metal plates with
high-yield strength can provide stiffness and strength sufficient
to exhibit stable structural behavior similar to those of monolithic
concrete columns at the ultimate load limit state with large defor-
mation. The strains of the metal plates in Specimen C1 with high-
yield-strength (650 MPa) plates were found to be lower than those
of Specimen C1-1 with a yield strength of 325 MPa, as shown in
Table 3 and Figs. 13(c and d). These results indicate that a larger
deformation could be induced at the plates with less stiffness,
whereas rebars and concrete attached to the plates with larger
stiffness were more activated, as shown in Table 3. The differences
of rates of strain increase between Specimens C1 and C1-1 were not
noticeable at connecting bolts and headed studs [Figs. 13(e and f)].
At a concrete strain of 0.003, the strains of the bolts connecting
column plates of yield strengths of 650 MPa for Specimen C1
and 325 MPa for Specimen C1-1 were 0.00301 and 0.00299, respec-
tively. This showed that the total tension forces required to place the
columns both above and below in positions were similar regardless
of the yield strength of the column plates. Microscopic strains in the
structural elements of the mechanical joints were evaluated, as they
were verified by the experimental investigation for both Specimens
C1 and C2 (Table 3). The strains and stresses of the structural ele-
ments including concrete, rebar, column plates, and connecting bolts
at a concrete strain of 0.003 were compared with results of the
numerical investigation and showed a good match at the locations
of gauges and corresponding meshes selected for the comparison
(Fig. 14). The locations of gauges are indicated in Fig. 14, as well
as the comparison of the test data and FEA results.
Adjustment of the Height of the Column Plates to
Avoid Concrete Degradation
The monolithic column provided nearly 1.5 times larger stiffness
and 1.2 times larger strength of the Specimens C1 and C2 with
column plates. The underestimation of stiffness and strength was

© ASCE 04018254-11 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 12. Influence of the yield strength of metal plates on the flexural capacity: (a) at lateral loads of 63.3 kN corresponding to concrete strain of
0.003; Specimen C1 with high-yield strength (650 MPa); and (b) at lateral loads of 62.2 kN corresponding to concrete strain of 0.003; Specimen C1-1
with yield strength of 325 MPa.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

Fig. 13. Numerical strain–stroke relationship of C1, C2, and C3 (dilation angle of 30° and full damage): (a) concrete; (b) rebar; (c) upper plate;
(d) lower plate; (e) bolt; and (f) headed studs.

© ASCE 04018254-12 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

 Fig. 14. Comparison of gauges and mesh locations between the test results and FEA for Specimen C1.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 15. Overturning moments at plate locations.

caused by the premature concrete damage due to the substantial
compression forces exerted by metal plates on the concrete below
the metal plates during overturning. A short length of precast con-
crete was sandwiched between the basement and the steel connec-
tion plate, resulting in the plates that compressed the sandwiched
concrete section and the concrete that failed under compression. A
loud sound was heard at the stroke of 60 mm between the metal
plates and the foundation [Fig. 6(c)]. However, the stress and rate of
strain increase found from the rebar of Specimens C1 and C2 with
mechanical joints were similar to those observed for the monolithic
specimen. The rebars of Specimens C1 and C2 underwent strains at
the microscopic level similar to those of Specimen C3. This con-
sideration indicated that the strength reduction found in the speci-
men with mechanical joints was not caused by the structural
degradation of the mechanical joints including rebars attached to
plates, as can be seen in Figs. 6(d and e) for Specimen C1 and
in Fig. 7(c) for Specimen C2. In Specimen C2-2 (Legend 5) shown
in Figs. 10 and 15, the location of column plates was adjusted to
improve the design by avoiding concrete degradation. Numerical
analysis was performed for Specimen C2-2 with the same con-
nection type but at a higher location than near column bottom,
particularly on the column midlength. Concrete damage was not
implemented in the numerical model of Specimen C2-2 because
no crushing damage with concrete degradation was expected to oc-
cur between the relocated plates and the foundation. The analysis
results indicated that lower field compression stress was exerted on
the sandwiched concrete since the length of the precast concrete
column was longer now. The numerical load-displacement relation-
ship indicated by Legend 5 in Fig. 10 was closer to that of the
monolithic specimen represented by Legends 3 (cohesive) and 4
(tie) in Fig. 10 than by Legends 1 and 2 (embedded model with
damage variable) for Specimens C1 and C2. The strength degrada-
tion due to concrete bearing crushes observed in Specimens C1 and
C2 could have been prevented if the plates had been located higher
than the test specimens. It is recommended that the column plates
be laminated not too close to the column base to avoid premature
concrete damage. In the design phase, the location of mechanical
plates should be determined with care so as not to cause premature
concrete degradation. Compressive stress in the concrete below the
column plates should be calculated, so that strength and stiffness of
concrete under different load combinations are ensured sufficient.
The location of the precast concrete column connection can be de-
termined as follows. The compressive stress exerting on the column
between plates and base is calculated by using Eqs. (14) and (15)
based on overturning moment acting at the plate level as shown in
Fig. 15, when the plates were located at h=2 of column height
M 1 ¼ 122 kN × 0.75 m ¼ 92 kN · m ð14Þ
MðkdÞ
σ¼ ¼ 31 MPa ð15Þ
I cr
The compressive stress that occurred in the column was less
than the compressive strength of concrete (33.1 MPa), inducing
no concrete failure under compression. The column with the
mechanical joint at h=2 demonstrated similar capacity to that of
monolithic columns as also verified by load-displacement relation-
ship shown by Legends 3 and 4 in Fig. 10.

© ASCE 04018254-13 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254

 (a)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 16. Numerical deformation-stroke relationship for the plates of C1 and C2 (dilation angle of 30° and full damage): (a) upper plate; and (b) lower plate.
Influence of the Headed Studs on the Flexural Capacity
of the Connection
Strains in headed studs were slightly larger at C1-1 with metal
plates with a 325-MPa yield strength than at C1 with a 650-MPa
yield strength because headed studs were more engaged to provide
additional stiffness for the joints of plates with lower yield strength.
Table 3 also compares strains and stresses of the mechanical joints
for Specimen C1 with headed studs with those for Specimen C2
without headed studs at a concrete strain of 0.003 when considering
concrete damaged plasticity. The strains of the metal plates with
650-MPa yield strength were slightly larger for Specimen C2 (with-
out headed studs) than Specimen C1 (with headed studs). This re-
sult indicated that larger deformation of the plates having lower
flexural capacity without headed studs resulted in less activation
of rebars and concrete attached to the plates. However, the influ-
ence of the stiffness of metal plates installed in Specimens C1 and
C2 on the strain-stroke relationship up to the concrete strain of
0.003 was similar, as shown in Fig. 13. This indicated that the
stresses and rates of strain increase for the mechanical joints were
similar to one another regardless of the inclusion of headed studs.
Activation of Strains of Structural Components
Figs. 13(c and d) show the rate strain of increase relative to the
stroke for the upper and lower column plates, respectively. The
metal plates did not yield for both Specimens C1 and C2 when
concrete strain reached 0.003, whereas the upper plate with C1-1
of SM490 plate yielded. The stiffness of the plates of Specimens C1
and C2 shown in Figs. 13(c and d) were sufficient to activate the
rebars and concrete, similar to those of monolithic concrete col-
umn, as shown in Figs. 13(a and b). Small strains and low rates
of strain increase were observed for both of the column plates
of C1 and C2, as shown in Figs. 13(c and d), respectively. The duc-
tility and plastic strain rate obtained from Specimens C1 and C3
were also similar. The strain rates were higher in conventional steel
plates with a yield strength of 325 MPa (Specimen C1-1 with
SM490) than in plates with a high-yield strength of 650 MPa
(Specimen C1 with HSA 800). This indicated that column plates
with high-yield strength deformed less, activating rebars attached to
the column plates more effectively up to a concrete strain of
0.008, as shown in Fig. 13(b). Plate deformations are shown in
Figs. 16(a and b). At the concrete strain of 0.003, the deformations
of 0.666 and 0.686 mm for upper plates and 0.759 and 0.771 mm
for lower plates were found for C1 and C2, respectively. No notice-
able deformation was observed at the termination of both test
specimens. These strains and deformations were small enough
to activate the concrete and rebars installed on the plates. The thin
© ASCE
J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254
(b)
plates with high-yield strength can be used to ensure no yielding or
lower damage in the plate. A thicker conventional steel plate comes
with considerable drawbacks in cost and handling and is thus not
recommended. For splicing columns, the damage level can be con-
trolled by tracing strains of column plates and their influence on the
activation level of the rebars attached to the column plates.
Conclusion
To splice precast concrete component by implementing mechanical
joints with high-yield strength, structural behavior of the hybrid
mechanical joint with concrete must be understood. The structural
behavior of the hybrid joints was predicted in both nonlinear and
plastic regions. The finite-element parameters, including calibrated
dilation angles and viscosity regulation, were validated by the strain
data retrieved from the experimental investigations of the speci-
mens subjected to cyclic loadings. This study compared strains cal-
culated numerically and those retrieved from the test data and
yielded acceptably reliable accurate results representing real-world
behavior at the microscopic level. The structural performance of the
mechanical joints for the precast concrete columns proposed in the
present study was demonstrated by the experiment, which sub-
sequently verified the numerical analysis that included considera-
tion of damaged concrete plasticity. Strain evolution of the column
joints was presented with the failure modes, deformation of the
metal plates, and the predictions of both strains/stresses and flexu-
ral capacity of the bolted column-to-column joint with high-yield
strength. The numerical evaluation of the load-displacement rela-
tionship, the flexural load capacity, and strains in the structural
components comprising the mechanical joint subjected to mono-
tonic loads matched the test data well at the microscopic level.
The design of the proposed connections was performed with an
understanding of structural performances based on concrete plas-
ticity, along with damage characteristics of concrete, finding the
appropriate plate thickness, size of bolt, and their positioning. This
study paid careful attention to these elements, which were interact-
ing with the concrete section. This study also elucidated how metal
plates could be integrated with concrete sections to offer resistance
to the cyclic loads relative to the varied yield strengths of metal
plates. Although bolted column plates were primarily designed to
act as rigid connections, these connections may fall into the semi-
rigid category when the stiffness of the mechanical joint is not suf-
ficient to activate the structural element attached to the joint plates.
The premature failure of concrete was exhibited when the column
plates were laminated too low and too close to the column base,
failing to prevent premature concrete degradation. In the design
04018254-14 J. Struct. Eng.
 phase, the location of the mechanical plates should be determined
with care not to cause substantial concrete degradation. The high-
yield-strength mechanical joints with the 26-mm-thick plates
provided the required stiffness and strength when the length of
the sandwiched concrete column between column plate and base
was long enough not to cause high compression stresses in the
sandwiched concrete. The damage concrete parameters must be
implemented in the numerical model once concrete degradation
is expected in the design. It is recommended that mechanical joints
be installed and encased in floor slabs with slab concrete.
Acknowledgments
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kyung Hee University on 12/10/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
This work was supported by the Basic Science Research Program
through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded
by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2016R1D1A1A02937558).
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
Ari = area of rebar layer i (i ¼ 1 − 3) (mm2 );
B = width of beam section (mm);
b 0 = distance from face of bolt to face of connected
member (mm);
c = height of concrete compression zone (neutral
axis) (mm);
D = depth of beam section;
d = effective depth of section;
dc = distance from centroid to extreme fiber in compression
of beam (mm);
di = distance from rebar layer i (i ¼ 1 − 3) to extreme fiber
in compression of beam (mm);
Er = Young’s modulus of rebar (MPa);
Fri = force given by rebar layer i (i ¼ 1 − 3) (kN);
Fsi = force given by part i of L-steel section (kN);
Fyp = yield stress of plate (MPa);
f c0 = concrete compressive strength (MPa);
fyR = yield strength of rebar (MPa);
I cr = moment of inertia of cross-sectional area;
k = ration between neutral axis (c) and effective depth (d)
of section;
M 1 = moment at joint level (kN·m);
M n;bolts = nominal tensile strength of bolts;
M t = required moment demand (kN·m);
n = number of bolts;
Pu = required axial strength (kN);
p = projected length of overlapping branch on chord (mm)
or tributary length per pair of bolts in perpendicular
direction (mm);
s = bolt spacing (mm);
tmin = minimum thickness required to eliminate prying
action (mm);
tp = thickness of plate (mm);
V n;bolt = bolt nominal shear strength (kN);
V u = required shear force (kN);
α = stress factors for concrete areas (i);
γ = centroid factor;
εcm = strain at extreme fiber of concrete area (εcm ¼ 0.003);
εri = strain of rebar layer i (i ¼ 1 − 3); and
εy = yield strain of steel plate.
© ASCE 04018254-15
J. Struct. Eng., 2019, 145(2): 04018254
References
AISC. 2005. Prequalified connections for special and intermediate steel
moment frames for seismic applications. AISC 358. Chicago: AISC.
AISC. 2015. “Steel construction manual.” In Part 9: Design of connection
elements. 15th ed. Chicago: AISC.
Ali, A., D. Kim, and S. G. Cho. 2013. “Modeling of nonlinear cyclic load
behavior of I-shaped composite steel-concrete shear walls of nuclear
power plants.” Nucl. Eng. Technol. 45 (1): 89–98. https://doi.org/10
.5516/NET.09.2011.055.
Bahaari, M. R., and A. N. Sherbourne. 2000. “Behavior of eight-bolt large
capacity endplate connections.” Comput. Struct. 77 (3): 315–325.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(99)00218-7.
Bursi, O. S., and J. P. Jaspart. 1998. “Basic issues in the finite element
simulation of extended end plate connections.” Comput. Struct.
69 (3): 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(98)00136-9.
Dassault Systèmes Simulia. 2014. ABAQUS analysis user’s manual 6.14-2.
Providence, RI: Dassault Systèmes Simulia.
Díaz, C., M. Victoria, P. Martí, and O. M. Querin. 2011. “FE model of
beam-to-column extended end-plate joints.” J. Constr. Steel Res.
67 (10): 1578–1590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2011.04.002.
Elliott, K. S. 2016. Precast concrete structures. Boca Raton, FL: CRC
Press.
FEMA. 2000. State of the art report on connection performance.
FEMA-355D. Washington, DC: FEMA.
Guan, D., Z. Guo, Q. Xiao, and Y. Zheng. 2016. “Experimental study of a
new beam-to-column connection for precast concrete frames under re-
versal cyclic loading.” Adv. Struct. Eng. 19 (3): 529–545. https://doi.org
/10.1177/1369433216630122.
Heinisuo, M., M. Laasonen, H. Ronni, and T. Anttila. 2010. “Integration
of joint design for steel structures using product model.” In Proc.,
Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, 323. Nottingham,
UK: Nottingham University Press.
Hu, J. Y., W. K. Hong, and S. C. Park. 2017. “Experimental investigation of
precast concrete based dry mechanical column-column joints for precast
concrete frames.” Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build. 26 (5): e1337. https://
doi.org/10.1002/tal.1337.
Ju, S. H., C. Y. Fan, and G. H. Wu. 2004. “Three-dimensional finite ele-
ments of steel bolted connections.” Eng. Struct. 26 (3): 403–413. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2003.11.001.
Maggi, Y. I., R. M. Gonçalves, R. T. Leon, and L. F. L. Ribeiro. 2005.
“Parametric analysis of steel bolted end plate connections using finite
element modeling.” J. Constr. Steel Res. 61 (5): 689–708. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2004.12.001.
Nzabonimpa, J. D., and W. K. Hong. 2018. “Structural performance of
detachable precast composite column joints with mechanical metal
plates.” Eng. Struct. 160: 366–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct
.2018.01.038.
Nzabonimpa, J. D., W. K. Hong, and J. Kim. 2017. “Mechanical connections
of the precast concrete columns with detachable metal plates.” Struct.
Des. Tall Spec. Build. 26 (17): e1391. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1391.
Nzabonimpa, J. D., W. K. Hong, and D. H. Nguyen. 2018. “Post-yield
behavior of fixed steel beams encased in concrete with plastic rotation
capability under monotonic loads.” Mater. Struct. 51 (3): 70. https://doi
.org/10.1617/s11527-018-1201-4.
Packer, J., D. Sherman, and M. Lecce. 2010. Steel Design Guide 24:
Hollow structural section connections. Chicago: AISC.
Proverbs, D. G., G. D. Holt, and P. O. Olomolaiye. 1998. “Factors
impacting construction project duration: A comparison between France,
Germany and the UK.” Build. Environ. 34 (2): 197–204. https://doi.org
/10.1016/S0360-1323(98)00004-3.
Saberi, V., M. Gerami, and A. Kheyroddin. 2014. “Comparison of bolted end
plate and T-stub connection sensitivity to component thickness.” J. Constr.
Steel Res. 98: 134–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.02.012.
Wan, S., C. H. Loh, and S. Y. Peng. 2001. “Experimental and theoretical
study on softening and pinching effects of bridge column.” Soil Dyn.
Earthquake Eng. 21 (1): 75–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261
(00)00073-7.
J. Struct. Eng.