Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Experimental investigation of hybrid mechanical joints for L-shaped T

columns replacing conventional grouted sleeve connections
J.D. Nzabonimpa, Won-Kee Hong
⁎

Department of Architectural Engineering, Kyung-Hee University, Yongin 446-701, South Korea

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Hybrid mechanical joints with laminated metal plates replacing conventional grouted sleeve connections for
Irregularly shaped column irregularly shaped columns were proposed. Interior bolts were implemented in the metal plates to provide a
Steel-concrete composite precast frames structural capacity similar to that of monolithic columns. Based on this study, the use of a sufficient number of
Column plates interior bolts rather than thicker plates is recommended for irregularly shaped precast columns. An experimental
Lego-type frame
investigation of “L”-shaped precast concrete column joints with laminated mechanical plates for fully and
Assemblage with laminated mechanical plates
Grouted sleeve connections
partially restrained moment connections was performed. In the proposed connections, a pair of steel plates with
sufficient stiffness was used to enable axial loads and the moment to be transferred at the joints. High-strength
bolts connecting two precast column components offered a partially or fully restrained moment connection. The
structural behavior of the irregular columns with mechanical joints was evaluated experimentally. This study
demonstrated how the rebar and steel sections were activated, contributing to the flexural capacity of the metal
plates. The precast columns with L-shaped sections in this study fit inside the corners of the walls in residential
buildings, replacing rectangular columns that do not fit at the corners.

1. Introduction were presented.

1.1. Previous studies
Recently, precast concrete members have gained popularity over
conventional construction methods, which include the use of cast-in-
place concrete and sleeve connection methods. These methods are not
attractive since they lengthen the construction period and require
extensive pour forms for the concrete cast. Although pre-fabricated
members demonstrate many advantages, the structural behavior of
these components during earthquakes remains questionable. Elliot [1]
introduced moment connections between upper and lower precast
concrete columns. This method requires the casting of either a special
mortar or a high-strength concrete around the longitudinal reinforcing
bars to ensure sufficient bonding between reinforcing bars. Guan et al.
[2] performed an experimental study of a new beam-to-column con-
nection using a bulb anchor for precast concrete frames under reversal
cyclic loading. They provided simpler rebar splicing, but pour forms at
the joints were required to cast concrete. A recent study conducted by
Clementi et al. [3] verified the seismic performance of pre-fabricated
reinforced concrete buildings constructed with dowel pin connections.
In their study, joint behavior was extensively examined, and some
recommendations for upgrading existing joints for precast members
Joint design is also an important key element for the structural
safety of precast concrete members. Previous researchers performed
extensive studies to assess the structural integrity and application of
precast concrete members [4–6]. The seismic performance of beam-
column connections in precast concrete structures, highlighting the
importance of connections in precast concrete structures, can be found
in a study by Choi et al. [7]. Those authors [7] concluded that the joint
strength was 1.15 times that expected for monolithic reinforced con-
crete construction with ductile behavior due to tensile deformability by
ECC and the yielding steel plate. Negro et al. [8] performed pseudo-
dynamic tests on a full-scale, 3-story precast concrete building and
found that dry precast (quasi) emulative moment-resisting frames
produced an effective connection system when activated at all floors.
Bournas et al. [9] also investigated the behavior of mechanical con-
nections via pseudodynamic tests on a full-scale, 3-story precast con-
crete building. The response of the connections of precast RC frames
subjected to seismic loads was enhanced by application of a proposed
beam-to-column connection system. Hu and Hong [10] studied the
structural behavior of column-to-column joints for precast concrete
columns. In their study, six specimens were loaded to failure to de-
termine their structural performance and failure modes, and specimens
with thick plates were able to transfer moments through the

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jean@khu.ac.kr (J.D. Nzabonimpa), hongwk@khu.ac.kr (W.-K. Hong).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.01.123
Received 5 February 2018; Received in revised form 5 January 2019; Accepted 28 January 2019
0141-0296/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong
interconnected elements. However, specimens with metal plates of in-
sufficient stiffness experienced severe deformation of those metal
plates, leading to an insufficient flexural capacity of the joints. Only
plates with the required stiffness were able to create a rigid joint be-
tween the connected precast column units.
A limited number of experimental and analytical studies have been
conducted to understand the structural behavior of bolted connections
for precast concrete columns [11–13]. Thambiratnam and Para-
masivam [11] performed an experimental investigation to study the
structural behavior of base plates subjected to axial loads and moments
on the column; parameters including plate thickness and eccentricity of
the load were investigated, and the authors concluded that the primary
failure of the joint was yielding of the base plate. Ermopoulos and
Stamatopoulos [12] analytically investigated the structural response of
a base plate subjected to cyclic loading. Seismic damage assessment was
performed for all of the precast beams and columns [13]. The authors
[13] concluded that the frame exhibited high energy dissipation during
earthquake simulations. Similar studies [14–18] were performed to
assess the seismic behavior of end plates for beam-column joints. Some
studies claimed that bolted connections with sufficient structural stiff-
ness were able to demonstrate ductility with high energy dissipation for
use in seismic areas. Numerical models were also introduced to conduct
parametric analysis of bolted end plates using a finite element modeling
package [19–21]. These models focused on the structural behavior of
bolted joints considering material nonlinearities and geometrical con-
figurations, including plate thickness and bolt diameter. One study
presented parametric studies of initial rotation stiffness of a bolted
connection [20].
1.2. Research significance of this study
Conventional precast joints use grouted sleeve connections. In this
type of connection, tensile strength of the grouted sleeves is needed for
quality grouted joints. In this study, the structural performance of a
hybrid mechanical joint with metal plates, replacing conventional
grouted sleeve connections, was evaluated for irregularly shaped col-
umns. This study also highlights the use of interior bolts to increase the
flexural capacity of precast concrete columns connected via metal
plates. In this regard, three specimens, LC1, LC2, and LC3, fabricated
with bolted metal plates were loaded to failure under cyclic loads. The
geometric configurations of LC1 and LC2 were identical, except interior
bolts were added to Specimen LC2 to verify the increase in structural
strength with additional bolts. Specimen LC3 was a control monolithic
specimen without plates that was fabricated as a monolithic steel-
concrete column. The specifications of the specimens are presented in
Table 1
Material properties of the structural elements for the tested specimens.
Category Size (mm)
Concrete column (All specimens) L shape: 800 × 800 (width: 200)
Upper plate for column (Specimens LC1 and LC2) L shape: 1000 × 1000 (width: 400, thickness: 35)
Lower plate for column (Specimens LC1 and LC2) L shape: 1000 × 1000
(width: 400, thickness: 35)
Filler plate for column (Specimens LC1 and LC2) L shape: 1000 × 1000
(width: 400, thickness: 15)
Bolts (Specimens LC1 and LC2) M22 (diameter: 22)
Nuts (Specimens LC1 and LC2) M25 (diameter: 25)
Column rebar (All specimens) HD25 (diameter: 25)
Hoops for column (All specimens) HD10 (diameter: 10)
244
Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277
Table 1, where rebars, metal plates, bolts, and L-shaped steel are spe-
cified with material properties and dimensions. The influence of in-
terior bolts on the flexural capacity of joint connections was over-
looked. In addition, L-shaped column sections were introduced with the
aim of replacing rectangular columns that do not fit at the corners. It
should be noted that these irregular columns are preferred by architects
due to their architectural flexibility. The proposed joints, which contain
bolted metal plates, reduce construction time by eliminating the time
required to cure concrete for conventional grouted sleeve connections.
The proposed bolted joints are believed to offer fast erection of precast
concrete frames for modular construction and heavy industrial plants.
2. Description of the hybrid mechanical joints with laminated
metal plates
Three specimens, LC1, LC2, and LC3, were fabricated as shown in
Fig. 1(a) and (b). Structural details of the tested specimens are shown in
Fig. 1(c). These specimens were fabricated without/with interior bolts
connecting laminated plates and included a control monolithic spe-
cimen. The structural performance and failure modes of the mechanical
joints for irregular steel-concrete composite columns were investigated.
The geometric configurations of Specimens LC1 and LC2 were identical,
except eight interior bolts (Fig. 1(b)) were added to Specimen LC2.
Specimens LC1 and LC2 were designed with bolted metal plates (an
upper plate, a filler plate, and a lower plate), as shown in Fig. 1(d) and
(e), while Specimen LC3, shown in Fig. 1(f), is a cast-in-place specimen
without plates, fabricated as a monolithic steel-concrete column.
Metal plates without/with holes for interior bolts are shown in
Fig. 2(a) and (b). Upper and lower metal plates with a thickness of
35 mm were used, while the filler plates were manufactured with a
thickness of 15 mm. The filler plate introduced in this section was not
used as a structural element; instead, its role was to accommodate the
nuts connecting the column rebars to the lower and upper column
plates. The counterbores prepared for splicing vertical column rebars
are also exhibited in Fig. 2(a), in which the threaded ends of the vertical
rebars were anchored to the rear side of the column plates. Counter-
bores were also used to accommodate nuts connecting the upper
column and lower column rebars to the metal plates. The L-shaped steel
sections were groove-welded to the upper and lower plates, as shown in
Fig. 2(c). The fabricated frames are assembled in Fig. 2(d), demon-
strating interior bolts installed in the holes prepared on the column
plate of the upper column unit. The material properties and the di-
mensions of the structural elements, including rebars, metal plates,
bolts, and L-shaped steel, are summarized in Table 1.
Material
Concrete compressive strength: 30 MPa
Material (steel, SM490), tensile yield stress (Fy = 325 MPa)
Ultimate strength (Fu = 490 MPa)
Tensile yield stress (Fy = 900 MPa)
Ultimate strength (Fu = 1000 MPa)
Tensile yield stress (Fy = 900 MPa)
Ultimate strength (Fu = 1000 MPa)
Tensile yield stress (Fy = 600 MPa)
Tensile yield stress (Fy = 400 MPa)
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Elevated view

(b) Mechanical joints of L-type concrete columns for experimental investigation;

Specimens LC1, LC2, and LC3

(c) Typical specimen layout; L-type columns

(Structural details of the tested specimens)
Fig. 1. Geometric configurations of the tested specimens.

245
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(d) Geometric details of the mechanical joint; Specimen LC1 (without interior bolts)

(e) Geometric details of the mechanical joint; Specimen LC2 (with interior bolts)

(f) Geometric details of Specimen LC3

Fig. 1. (continued)

3. Fabrication of test specimens
The test specimens (LC1, LC2, and LC3) equipped with extensive
strain gauges are presented in Fig. 3. Strain gauges were attached in
locations where stress concentrations were expected to occur in re-
sponse to cyclic load. Strain gauges were used in various locations to
capture the complete structural behavior and failure modes of the joint.
In addition, these strain gauges allowed understanding of not only the
contribution of each structural element to the flexural capacity of the
proposed joint, but also exploration of the load path at each structural
element during application of loads of the proposed mechanical joint. A
total of 163 gauges was attached at various locations, including on

246
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a ) Metal plates for Specimen LC1; without interior bolts

(b) Metal plates for Specimen LC2; with interior bolts

Fig. 2. Joint details of the proposed mechanical joint.

rebars, steel, and concrete, as shown in Fig. 3 and summarized in
Table 2. In Specimen LC1, a total of 48 strain gauges was attached, as
summarized in Table 2. The strain gauge plan for Specimen LC1, shown
in Fig. 3(a) and Table 2, comprised concrete gauges (from Gauge C1 to
Gauge C16), rebar strain gauges (from Gauge 9 to Gauge 24), upper
column plate gauges (from Gauge 1 to Gauge 4), lower column plate
gauges (from Gauge 5 to Gauge 8), and strain gauges for the L-shaped
embedded steel (from Gauge 25 to Gauge 32). Alternatively, a total of
52 strain gauges were attached to Specimen LC2, as indicated in Table 2
and Fig. 3(b). Fig. 3(c) presents the control specimen (LC3) with no
metal plates and equipped with 40 strain gauges. Fig. 3(d) and (e) show
gauges attached to metal plates/steel columns and locations of strain
gauges in terms of the height of the specimen, respectively.
Fig. 4 illustrates the sequence in which the tested specimens (LC1,
LC2, and LC3) were fabricated in a manufacturing plant. Column rebars
were cut, bent, and assembled as indicated in Fig. 4(a). Column rebars
from the lower and upper column units were connected to the metal
plates via nuts, which were accommodated in counterbores, as shown in
Fig. 2. In Specimen LC3, column rebars and L-shaped steel were not
amputated because Specimen LC3 was designed monolithically without
joint connection as a conventional steel-concrete column control. The
rebars and L-shaped steel assembled for Specimens LC1 and LC3 are
shown in Fig. 4(a). The gauge locations for column rebars, metal plates,
and L-shaped steel were polished before attaching strain gauges. Strain
gauges were attached to each structural element and were protected
with waterproof tape before casting concrete, as indicated in Fig. 4(b).
Fig. 4(b) shows the instrumented monolithic test specimen and speci-
mens with laminated metal plates with/without interior bolts. Interior
bolts were installed to provide additional stiffness for the mechanical
joints, preventing deformation of the plates. The completed test speci-
mens were transported to the testing lab, as shown in Fig. 4(c). Among
the tested samples, five were loaded to failure to verify the maximum
compressive strength of the concrete used during the experiment.
Fig. 4(d) and (e) indicate the results obtained from each test sample,
summarized in Table 3. The average compressive strength of concrete
obtained from five test samples was 29.1 MPa, while steel and re-bar
demonstrated average yield strengths of 646.7 MPa and 387.1 MPa,
respectively.

247
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(c) Steel sections groove-welded to a column plate (Specimen LC1)

(d) Laminated metal plates with holes for interior bolts (Specimen LC2)
Fig. 2. (continued)

The instrumented test specimens (LC1, LC2, and LC3) were pre- was approximately 9.4 tons, and extensive steel sections and rebars
pared for application of cyclic loads controlled by displacements using were used in the foundation (refer to Fig. 1(c) and 4(a)), which was also
an actuator with a capacity of 2000 kN located 2.7 m from the foun- reinforced by two layers of carbon sheets in directions perpendicular to
dation, as shown in Fig. 5(a). The estimated weight of each specimen each other, as illustrated in Figs. 1(a) and 5(a). The carbon sheets were

248
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Strain gauges attached to Specimen LC1

(b) Strain gauges attached to Specimen LC2

(c) Strain gauges attached to Specimen LC3

Fig. 3. Strain gauges for the test specimens.

added to prevent base rotation. The load was applied at 1.7 m and
2.785 m from the joint level and top of the foundation, respectively.
The size of the foundation was 2.5 m × 2.5 m × 0.5 m, while the L-
shaped wall column was 800 mm × 800 mm with a thickness of
200 mm (see Fig. 1(c)). The height of each specimen measured 3.5 m
from the foundation level to the top of the wall column, and the
boundary and loading conditions were the same for all three specimens.
Fig. 5(a) and (b) depict specimens subjected to the cyclic loading pro-
tocol to explore the hysteretic behavior of the specimens. LVDTs (linear
variable differential transformers) were also installed in each specimen
to measure the displacements of the columns. These specimens were
loaded with a cyclic loading protocol of two or three cycles for each

249
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(d) Gauges attached to metal plates and steel columns

(e) Location of gauges

Fig. 3. (continued)

Table 2
Strain gauges attached to the tested specimens.
Specimen Strain gauges for metal plates Strain gauges for rebars Strain gauges for L-shaped steel Strain gauges for concrete Total

LC1 (Without interior bolts) Upper plate: 1 ∼ 4 9 ∼ 24 25 ∼ 32 C1 ∼ C16 48 gauges

Lower plate : 5 ∼ 8
LC2 (With interior bolts) Upper plate: 1 ∼ 6 13 ∼ 28 29 ∼ 36 C1 ∼ C16 52 gauges
Lower plate : 7 ∼ 12
LC3 (Control specimen) N/A 1 ∼ 16 17 ∼ 24 C1 ∼ C16 40 gauges

stroke length, as depicted in Fig. 5(b). In this study, quasi-static testing
offered an opportunity to monitor the structural performance of the
proposed mechanical joint for precast concrete-based frames and to
capture the hysteretic behavior. The loading protocol was constructed
based on the seismic design guidelines suggested by AISC for qualifying
moment connection joints [22].
4. Experimental results and discussions
The three specimens (LC1, LC2, and LC3) were subjected to cyclic
loads to determine the structural behavior and associated failure modes
of the proposed column-column mechanical joints. The control spe-
cimen (LC3), designed as a monolithic steel-concrete composite
column, was introduced to compare its flexural capacity to those of the
precast wall columns with metal plates at the joints (LC1 and LC2). This
study also investigated the contribution of each structural element,
including metal plates, column rebars, high-strength bolts, and L-
shaped steel, to the flexural capacity of the mechanical joint by iden-
tifying the deformations and strains observed during the test. Table 3
summarizes the material properties obtained from the test samples
during testing of the full-scale test specimens (LC1, LC2, and LC3).
4.1. Structural behavior and failure modes of Specimen LC3 (control
monolithic specimen)
Specimen LC3, which was designed as a monolithic steel-concrete
composite column, was loaded to failure under cyclic loading. As pre-
viously mentioned, this specimen did not have metal plates, and it was
designed to verify the structural performance of the newly proposed
irregular column-column joints for precast concrete-based frames.
Concrete damage and cracks occurred at a stroke of 81 mm, and the
compressive forces were concentrated at the foundation level, as shown
in Fig. 6(a). The concrete was severely crushed when the specimen was
pulled with a lateral displacement of 135 mm. At this stage, major
compressive failures were observed. Points C and F (see Fig. 10) marked
the points at which the maximum loads were reached. Embedded ele-
ments, such as rebars and L-shaped steel, started to buckle due to the
large compressive forces when the concrete was damaged in

250
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Preparation of the structural elements for the test specimens

(b) Gauges attached to the test specimens

Fig. 4. Fabrication of test specimens LC3.

compression. Fig. 6(b) illustrates the deformed shape and buckling of
rebars and L-shaped steel at a stroke of 135 mm. Thereafter, the spe-
cimen was further pushed and pulled to a stroke of 158 mm, which
represents the end of the specimen test. From points C and F, the load
began to drop, and the applied loads were removed at a stroke of
158 mm, which indicates the end of the test, as shown in Fig. 6(c).
Fig. 7 depicts the hysteresis behavior of Specimen LC3. Asymmetric
structural responses were demonstrated in both the push and pull re-
gions. This is because the proposed precast steel-concrete composite
column was designed as an irregular L-shaped section. In the push re-
gion (positive region), the nominal flexural load capacity was as much
as 800 kN with a corresponding stroke of 102 mm, while the load ca-
pacity of −938 kN at a stroke of −107 mm was the peak in the pull
region (negative region). The test ended when the specimen reached a
stroke of 158 mm with loads of −800 kN and 732 kN in the pull and
push regions, respectively.
4.2. Structural behavior and failure modes of Specimen LC1
Specimen LC1 was designed with metal plates as explained pre-
viously. The metal plates (upper plate, lower plate, and filler plate)
were located at 1 m above the foundation. High strength bolts having a
yield strength of 900 MPa were used to connect the metal plates so that
a fully restrained moment connection could be realized. The plate
thicknesses for the upper, filler, and lower column plates were 35 mm,
15 mm, and 35 mm, respectively. Cyclic loads were applied laterally at
a height of 1.7 m from the metal plates, as illustrated in Fig. 5(a). Da-
mage for Specimen LC1 was initiated at a stroke of 54 mm. At this stage,
concrete cracks began occurring above and below the metal plates due
to the large compressive forces acting on the metal plates, as depicted in
Fig. 8(a). The specimen was loaded continuously until it reached a
stroke of 81 mm, initiating deformation of the metal plates and creating
a gap between the laminated plates. This gap became larger as the
specimen was pushed further. In Fig. 8(b), separation between metal
plates was observed when the specimen was pushed at 108 mm. The
tension forces generated from both the column rebar and L-shaped steel
section were acting on the metal plates, causing them to deform and the
gap between them to increase. Simultaneously, the first bolt fractured
during the first cycle when the specimen was pushed laterally to
108 mm; another bolt fractured when the specimen was pulled at
−108 mm. A total of four bolts failed after two cycles at strokes of
108 mm and −108 mm, as indicated in Fig. 8(b). The specimen was

251
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong
(c) Pouring the concrete and transportation to the testing lab
(d) Preparation of the specimen test; steel sections
(e) Preparation of the specimen test; rebar
Fig. 4. (continued)
loaded further until nine bolts fractured due to the large tension forces
acting on the mechanical joint. At a stroke of 135 mm, Specimen LC1
experienced severe damage, including plate deformations and failure of
nine bolts in tension, as depicted in Fig. 8(c); after this stage, the test
252
Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277
Table 3
Material properties obtained from the test samples.
Category Average value
Concrete samples (5 samples) Compressive strength: 29.1 MPa
Rebar (3 samples) Yield strength: 646.7 MPa
Ultimate strength: 831.3 MPa
Steel (3 samples) Yield strength: 387.1 MPa
Ultimate strength: 520.6 MPa
ended. The upper column unit was disassembled to investigate the
metal plate deformations, as illustrated in Fig. 8(d). The measured
deformations for the upper and lower column plates were 2 mm and
3 mm, respectively, indicating that these metal plates were not stiff
enough to provide a rigid joint unless additional interior bolts were
used. A large amount of energy was dissipated at the joint in two ways:
(1) plate deformation and (2) fracture of high-strength bolts. Concrete
crushing was not considered to be a major failure for Specimen LC1;
instead, high-strength bolts and the stiffness of metal plates were con-
sidered the two major parameters that influenced the structural per-
formance of the proposed mechanical joint when interior bolts were not
present. Fig. 8(e) describes the load-displacement relationships for
Specimen LC1. The nominal flexural load capacity of Specimen LC1 was
as much as 520 kN-m when the specimen was pushed at a stroke of
106 mm. Alternately, the nominal capacity of the specimen in the pull
region (negative region) was as much as −606 kN at a stroke of
−80 mm. The sudden decrease in load at points A and D (see Fig. 10)
was caused by the fracture of bolts, which is also shown in Fig. 8(e).
4.3. Structural behavior and failure modes of Specimen LC2
The geometric configuration of Specimen LC2 was similar to that of
Specimen LC1, except eight interior bolts were added in Specimen LC2
(see Fig. 1(b) and (e)). The interior bolts were used to increase the
stiffness of the joint so that the proposed joint could demonstrate a
structural performance similar to that of the monolithic steel-concrete
composite column (Specimen LC3). The concrete cracks initiated when
the specimen was pulled with a lateral displacement of 81 mm. Fig. 9(a)
illustrates the deflected shape and the concrete damage initiation when
cyclic loads were applied. The stiffness degradation of the mechanical
joint started when the stroke reached 158 mm, as indicated by point B
in Fig. 10. Specimen LC2 with interior bolts did not show significant
plate deformation at a stroke of 108 mm (Fig. 9(b)), while deformation
of the plate at a similar stroke started occurring when interior bolts
were absent (Fig. 8(b)). Fractures of the joint and exterior bolts were
delayed compared with a stroke of 108 mm for Specimen LC1 without
interior bolts (Fig. 8(b)). The fracture of the specimen with interior
bolts was not significant until around a stroke of 135 mm, as shown in
Fig. 9(c); however, at this stroke for Specimen LC1 without interior
bolts, most of the exterior bolts were fractured, terminating the test.
The metal plates were not deformed as much as in Specimen LC1, and
there was no separation between the metal plates until the interior bolts
failed. The interior bolts delayed deformation in the metal plates,
leading to high structural stiffness of the mechanical joint in Specimen
LC2. Specimen LC2 was loaded until six exterior bolts failed at a stroke
of 165 mm, as depicted in Fig. 9(d). The concrete did not experience
severe damage until the specimen was loaded further to a lateral dis-
placement of 183 mm. Fig. 9(e) demonstrates that concrete was crushed
in both the negative and positive regions. The mechanical joint for
Specimen LC2 was deteriorated, and the loads were removed after
completion of the cycle (183 mm). Fig. 9(f) illustrates the end of the test
with failure modes for Specimen LC2. Fig. 9(f) indicates the hysteresis
behavior of Specimen LC2, which was designed with bolted metal
plates having both interior and exterior bolts. The load substantially
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Full scale specimen ready for loading

(b) Loading protocol used during the experiment

Fig. 5. Specimens subjected to the loading protocol.

253
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Concrete crushed at a stroke of 81 mm

(b) Buckling of the embedded elements (rebars and L-shaped steel) at a stroke of
135 mm, corresponding to points C and F (Figure 10)

(c) End of the test at a stroke of 158 mm

Fig. 6. Failure modes of Specimen LC3 (control specimen).

254
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong
Fig. 7. Load-displacement relationships for Specimen LC3.
decreased at a stroke of 91 mm (push region) due to fracture of six high-
strength bolts. However, the load did not drop in the negative region
(pull region) at a stroke of 91 mm but continued to increase as there
was no failure of the structural elements, such as fracture of bolts or
deformation of metal plates. At a stroke of 91 mm, the specimen
reached its nominal lateral load capacity of 699 kN (push region); the
nominal lateral load capacity of −846 kN was obtained in the negative
region at a stroke of −130 mm (pull region). From this stage on for
Specimen LC2 with interior bolts, two interior bolts fractured due to
large tensile forces acting on the metal plates. A loud sound was heard
when the interior bolts were fractured. In the negative region, the load
started dropping at a stroke of 158 mm (see point B in Fig. 10) due to
concrete failure in the compression zone.
4.4. Comparisons of the structural performances of the three specimens
(LC1, LC2, and LC3)
The three specimens, LC1, LC2, and LC3, were loaded to failure to
explore the structural behavior and failure modes of the proposed L-
shaped precast steel-concrete composite columns. Specimen LC3 was
designed as a monolithic steel-concrete composite column, while the
remaining specimens (LC1 and LC2) were designed and fabricated with
metal plates at the joint connections. The plate thicknesses of 35 mm for
the upper column plate, 15 mm for the filler plate, and 35 mm for the
lower plate were the same for both Specimens LC1 and LC2. Boundary
and loading conditions were identical for all specimens. The presence of
interior bolts in Specimen LC2 was shown to provide effective stiffness
to the metal plates.
In general, the two specimens LC1 and LC2 demonstrated similar
structural behaviors and failure modes, which included the fracture of
bolts in tension and the crushing of concrete due to large compression
forces. The role of interior bolts was verified by a greater structural
response in Specimen LC2 than Specimen LC1. In addition, the use of
interior bolts delayed the structural deterioration in Specimen LC2
compared with Specimen LC1. The separation of metal plates was sig-
nificant in Specimen LC1, indicating that the stiffness of the metal
plates for Specimen LC1 was insufficient to provide a rigid joint.
Specimen LC2, which was reinforced by interior bolts, was able to
produce a strength similar to that of the monolithic steel-concrete
composite column (Specimen LC3). As illustrated in Fig. 10, the initial
stiffnesses for both Specimens LC2 and LC3 were identical until the load
reached 564 kN at a stroke of 38 mm (see push region). However, the
curves for LC2 and LC3 separated from one another as the specimens
were loaded further. A nominal lateral load capacity of 800 kN
(1360 kN-m) was reached in the control monolithic specimen, while
255
Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277
Specimen LC2 produced a nominal capacity of 699 kN (1188.3 kN-m).
Specimen LC1 reached a load of 400 kN at 38 mm, indicating that the
metal plates deformed and dissipated most of the energy via inelastic
deformation, leading to the lowest flexural moment capacity for Spe-
cimen LC1. The mechanical joints were designed to resist a design
moment (Mu) of 350 kN-m, as illustrated in Fig. 10. At the design stage,
Specimens LC2 and LC3 exhibited similar structural responses, in-
dicating that a mechanical joint without interior bolts can replace most
of the conventional steel-concrete composite precast columns. The de-
sign capacities for the proposed mechanical joints when concrete strain
reaches 0.003 are shown by dots in Fig. 10.
The hysteretic energy dissipation capacity for monolithic Specimen
LC3, defined as the area under the hysteresis curve, was observed to be
1.62 × 106 kN-mm, which is similar to the energy (1.50 × 106 kN-mm)
dissipated by Specimen LC2 having a mechanical joint with interior
bolts, indicating that the use of interior bolts can effectively enhance
the ductility of the proposed mechanical joint for columns with irre-
gular shapes to a level similar to that of a monolithic column. However,
the hysteretic energy dissipation capacity (6.57 × 105 kN-mm) mea-
sured for Specimen LC1 was significantly less than the energy
(1.50 × 106 kN-mm) dissipated by Specimen LC2 having a mechanical
joint with interior bolts, indicating that the absence of interior bolts
degrades the ductility of the proposed mechanical joint for columns
with irregular shapes. Inelastic energy dissipation was evaluated based
on a 20% load decrease with respect to the load at the maximum load
limit state.
4.5. Contribution of the structural elements to the flexural capacity of the
precast column-column joint based on the identified strains
The contributions of the structural elements to the flexural capacity
of the proposed mechanical joint were investigated in depth. Load-
strain curve for Specimen LC3 are plotted in Fig. 11, which elucidates
how the structural elements, including the concrete, column rebars, and
L-shaped steel members, contributed to the flexural capacity of Spe-
cimen LC3. The maximum concrete compressive strains recorded in
Specimen LC3 were as high as 0.0022 (push region, Legend 1) and
0.0013 (pull region, Legend 2). In Specimen LC3, concrete compressive
strain did not reach a strain of 0.003 (design limit) due to gauge mal-
function. Column rebar (Gauge 9), having a yield stress and strain of
600 MPa and 0.0029, respectively, yielded and reached a tensile strain
of 0.0068 (2.4εy, Legend 3), as illustrated in Fig. 11. Strains in column
rebar (Gauge 9) were over two times larger than yield strain, indicating
that column rebar significantly contributed to the flexural capacity of
Specimen LC3. Alternatively, strains observed in the embedded L-
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Concrete cracks initiated at a stroke of 54 mm

(b) Separation between metal plates

(c) End of the test at a stroke of 135 mm

Fig. 8. Structural performance and failure modes for Specimen LC1.

256
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(d) Disassembly of mechanical joints and measurement of plate deformation

(e) Load-displacement relationship

Fig. 8. (continued)

shaped steel were as much as 0.005, which was three times larger than
the yield strain of the steel material used in this experiment. Fig. 12(a)
and (b) explore the contributions of the column rebar, L-shaped steel,
concrete, and metal plates to the flexural capacity of Specimen LC1.
Concrete compressive strain reached the design limit (corresponding to
a strain of 0.003) at a load of 500 kN, as shown in Legends 1 and 2 of
Fig. 12(a). The L-shaped steel yielded at a tensile strain of 0.00156
(Legend 3 of Fig. 12(a)). However, the rebar did not yield, as shown in
Legend 5 of Fig. 12(a). The maximum tensile strains in the steel section
and rebar were 0.0008 and 0.0021, respectively (Legends 4 and 6 of
Fig. 12(a)). Deformations of the metal plates were verified by large
strains measured at the metal plates, as indicated in Fig. 12(b). The

257
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Concrete cracks initiated at a stroke of 81 mm

(b) Concrete cracks initiated at a stroke of 108 mm

(c) Bolts in the circle failed and the metal plates separated at a stroke of 135 mm
Fig. 9. Structural performance and failure modes of Specimen LC2.

258
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(d) Exterior bolts failed and the metal plates separated at a stroke of 165 mm

(e) Concrete damage and plate deformation occurred at a stroke of 183 mm

(f) End of the test at a stroke of 183 mm

(g) Load-displacement relationship

Fig. 9. (continued)

tensile strain measured at the lower plate was as much as 0.012 (four
times the yield strain of the rebar, Legend 2), while the tensile strain
measured at the upper plate was 0.00214, as indicated in Legend 1 of
Figs. 12(b) and 16(b). The strain gauge attached to the upper plate
malfunctioned after recording a strain of 0.00214. The tensile strains of
the metal plates when the concrete compressive strain reached 0.003
are marked in Fig. 12(b). The concrete, rebar, and L-shaped steel con-
tributed to the flexural capacity of the proposed joint connection by
providing large strains during load application. The contribution of the
structural elements, including the column rebar, concrete, L-shaped

259
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

Fig. 10. Load-displacement curves for LC1, LC2, and LC3.

Fig. 11. Load-strain relationships for the monolithic Specimen LC3.

steel, and metal plates, to the flexural capacity of Specimen LC2 is
explored in Fig. 13(a) and (b). The concrete strain reached a com-
pressive strain of 0.003 in both the positive and negative regions, as
shown in Legends 1 and 2 of Fig. 13(a). The L-shaped steel and column
rebar reached their yield points at tensile strain of 0.0029 and 0.0015,
respectively (Legends 4 and 5 of Fig. 13(a)), in the positive region (push
region). The gauge strain for the L-shaped steel did not function prop-
erly in the positive region (Legend 3 of Fig. 13(a)). Legends 4 and 6
represent the tensile strains of 0.0015 and 0.0021 at Gauges 35 and 26,
respectively, in the negative region (pull region). The tensile strains

260
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Concrete, rebar, and L-shaped steel

(b) Metal plates (upper and lower)

Fig. 12. Load-strain relationships for Specimen LC1.

measured at the metal plates are shown in Fig. 13(b). Strains in the
metal plates were as much as five times larger than the yield strain of
the steel material used in this experiment. The maximum strain re-
corded was 0.0085 (Legend 1 of Fig. 13(b)) in the upper column plate,
and its tensile strain reached 0.007 (Legend 2 of Fig. 13(b)) in the lower
column plate when concrete compressive strain reached the design
limit (εc = 0.003). The upper plate yielded when the specimen reached
its nominal flexural load capacity of 699 kN (push region), as illustrated
in Fig. 13(b). Fig. 14 compares the contributions of the structural ele-
ments to the flexural capacity of Specimens LC1, LC2, and LC3. The
concrete compressive strains reached their design limits in Specimens
LC1 and LC2; however, the strain gauge for the concrete did not
function properly in Specimen LC3, as illustrated in Fig. 14(a). The
concrete showed less brittle behavior for the specimens fabricated with
metal plates (Legends 2, 3, 5, and 6 in Fig. 14(a)) than the monolithic
column (Legends 1 and 2 in Fig. 14(a)); the specimen with interior bolts

261
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Concrete, rebar, and L-shaped steel

(b) Metal plates (upper and lower plates)

Fig. 13. Load-strain relationships for Specimen LC2.

demonstrated higher flexural capacity, indicating that the interior bolts
provide confining effects for concrete columns. The largest magnitudes
of strain in the L-shaped steel and rebars were found in the monolithic
Specimen LC3, as shown in Legends 3 and 6 in Fig. 14(b) and (c), which
summarize the tensile strains in the L-shaped steel and rebars for the
three specimens. The strains were followed in magnitude by Specimen
LC2 (Legends 2 and 5 in Fig. 14(b) and (c)) and then Specimen LC1
(Legends 1 and 4 in Fig. 14(b) and (c)). The deformation of the metal
plates prevented the rebars from full activation, contributing less to the
flexural capacity. Specimen LC1 with the least stiffness demonstrated
the largest plate deformation, which is responsible for the lowest tensile
strain activation for the rebar and steel section. Fig. 14(c) compares the
activation of column rebar in the three tested specimens. Large tensile
strains were found in Specimen LC3. Rebar tensile strains reached as
much as 0.0068 (Legend 3 in Fig. 14(c)) in Specimen LC3, while a
tensile strain of 0.0028 (Legend 2 in Fig. 14(c)) was recorded in Spe-
cimen LC2. The smallest tensile strain (0.0018) for the column rebar
was observed in Specimen LC1 due to large deformations of the metal
plates, which deactivate the rebar. The reduced activation is also de-
picted in Fig. 14(b) for the steel section. The lower metal plates for
Specimen LC1 (Gauge 8) demonstrated large tensile strains of 0.018
(Legend 2 of Fig. 14(d)), while tensile strains of 0.007 (Legend 4 of
Fig. 14(d)) were found in Specimen LC2 (Gauge 7), as indicated in
Fig. 14(d). This shows that addition of interior bolts in Specimen LC2
increased the stiffness of the mechanical joint, better activating tensile
rebar strain compared to Specimen LC1. The cyclic behaviors of the

262
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Load-strain relationship for the concrete (all specimens)

(b) Load-strain relationship for the embedded L-shaped steel (all specimens)
Fig. 14. Comparison of strain-load relationships for all specimens (LC1, LC2, and LC3).

selected strain gauges for Specimens LC1, LC2 and LC3 are plotted in
Figs. 15, 16, and 17, respectively. The cyclic performance of the column
plates in both tension and compression for Specimen LC1 with me-
chanical joints without interior bolts is outlined in Fig. 16(b). The
strains of the L-shaped steel section in Specimen LC1 were less activated
than those of Specimen LC2, which had mechanical joints with interior
bolts, as in Figs. 16(a) and 17, contributing less to the flexural strength,
as illustrated in Fig. 12. The interior bolts stiffening metal plates under
cyclic loads were shown to be effective.
5. Identification of microscopic strains based on finite element
models
5.1. Finite element meshes developed for mechanical joints
The ABAQUS library [23] introduced a wide range of elements that
can be applied in different problem domains. In the present study, the
first-order linear elements of type C3D8R (reduced integration ele-
ments) were selected to simulate the structural behavior of Specimens

263
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(c) Load-strain relationship for the column rebars (all specimens)

(d) Load-strain relationship for the metal plates (all specimens)

Fig. 14. (continued)

LC1, LC2 and LC3, as in Fig. 18(a) and (b). These elements are suitable
for complex FE models accommodating contacts, plasticity, and large
deformations. Structural elements including rebars, bolts, metal plates,
upper and lower columns, and nuts were discretized using reduced
integration elements (C3D8R). Alternatively, linear quadrilateral ele-
ments (R3D4) were used to model a rigid body on which a constant
monotonic load (controlled by displacement) was exerted (see
Fig. 18(a)).
Specimen LC1, modeled with 35 mm-thick plates having no interior
bolts, demonstrated a total mesh of 736,268 solid elements. This spe-
cimen was discretized with local and global seeds of 10 mm and 30 mm,
respectively. Local seeds were assigned at the joint (area of importance)
to create a fine mesh, while global seeds generating coarse mesh were
applied elsewhere. Interior bolts were used to strengthen the flexural
stiffness of the plates for Specimen LC2, which was constructed with a
total mesh of 756,860 solid elements. Alternatively, Specimen LC3,
fabricated as the monolithic column having no plates, exhibited a total
mesh of 251,761 solid elements. Specimen LC3 had no joint, resulting
in a smaller number of elements compared with Specimens LC1 and
LC2. To ensure the accuracy of the FE results, a fine mesh of 10 mm was
assigned at the area of importance (metal joint), while the remaining
part of the specimen was discretized with a coarse mesh. Fig. 18(a) and
(b) illustrate the geometric configurations of the full-scale finite ele-
ment models, whereas the test specimens are provided in Fig. 18(c).

264
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

Fig. 15. Strain readings for selected L-shaped steel, Specimen LC3.

(a) L-shaped steel

(b) Metal plates

Fig. 16. Strain readings for selected L-shaped steel, Specimen LC1.

In a previous work [21], the contact interactions between deform- authors [21] assigned surface-to-surface contact properties based on
able bodies, including concrete beams, metal plates, bolts, plates, and tangential and normal behavior. Tangential behavior was defined as
nuts, were presented in depth. These contact interactions were used to frictionless, while normal behavior was assigned based on the penalty
prevent elements from penetrating each other during the analysis. The method with hard contact for the pressure-overclosure relationship. To

265
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong
Fig. 17. Strain readings for selected L-shaped steel, Specimen LC2.
enhance the solver efficiency, surface-to-surface contacts were defined
with a constraint enforcement, which is referred to as the penalty
method. In the present work, the penalty method was used (1) to mi-
tigate problems related to over-constraints by reducing the number of
iterations required in an analysis and (2) to eliminate Lagrange multi-
pliers, improving solver efficiency. Fig. 19 illustrates the contact sur-
faces (master and slave surfaces) defined for the proposed column-
column mechanical joint.
5.2. Definition of constraints and material properties
In the present FE model, embedded elements, including L-shaped
steels, rebars, and hoops, were placed inside the host elements (con-
crete column), as shown in Fig. 20. A fixed boundary condition was
issued at the foundation to restrict possible movements of the specimen
during the application of loading. The material properties for embedded
and host elements were defined based on the tested samples. The
average tested concrete strength was 29.1 MPa. The yield strengths of
the embedded L-shaped steels and rebars were 387.1 MPa and
646.7 MPa, respectively. Inputs for the constitutive relationships of
embedded elements were defined based on the elasto-hardening beha-
vior of steel materials, while the stress-strain curve for unconfined
concrete suggested by Park et al. [24] considering the damaged plas-
ticity model was used to model concrete.
5.3. Structural behaviors of laminated metal plates implemented in
mechanical joints
The metal plates used for Specimens LC1 and LC2 experienced
tensile forces during application of a lateral load. Fig. 21 compares the
structural performance of metal plates for Specimen LC1 (without in-
terior bolts) and Specimen LC2 (with interior bolts) at the concrete
compressive strain of 0.003 (design limit). Metal plates stiffened with
interior bolts exhibited a small deformation of 0.4 mm, while the metal
plate without interior bolts experienced a large deformation of 1.5 mm
(see Fig. 21(a) and (b)). Strains in the upper and lower column plates
were also small, as in Fig. 21(a) and (b), when interior bolts were used,
indicating that interior bolts significantly enhanced the structural per-
formance of the proposed mechanical joint. Steel sections attached to
the plates in Specimen LC2 having interior bolts were more highly ac-
tivated than in Specimen LC1 having no interior bolts. However, much
266
Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277
higher tensile strain was exerted on the exterior bolts in LC1 than on
those in LC2 due to the interior bolts.
5.4. Numerical structural behavior of laminated metal plates in comparison
with test results
Nonlinear finite element analyses under static load were performed
to verify the structural performance of the monolithic irregular L-
shaped column. A constant monotonic load controlled by displacement
was applied for all specimens (LC1, LC2, and LC3) at a height of 2.7 m
above the foundation under the same load condition. In Fig. 22(a) of
Section 5, damaged concrete plasticity model was described with the
stress-strain response under uniaxial compression based on Kent Park
model. The stress-strain response behaves in a linear elastic fashion
until it reaches the initial yield stress c0 whereas elasto-plastic stress-
strain relationship was implemented for steel section. Numerical and
test results of Specimen LC3 (monolithic column) demonstrated good
agreement until a stroke of 100 mm, as shown in Fig. 22(b). The overall
structural performance of the irregular monotonic L-shaped column
numerically obtained was well correlated with that observed experi-
mentally. For Specimen LC1, two exterior bolts fractured due to large
tensile forces at metal plates at a stroke of 62.5 mm, exhibiting a load of
528 kN, as can be seen in the load-displacement relationship in Legend
6 of Fig. 22(b). Stresses and strains of the fractured Specimen LC1 are
plotted in Fig. 23. Specimen LC1, fabricated without interior bolts,
experienced a sudden load drop when two bolts fractured during the
numerical analysis. This fracture was also described in the experimental
investigation shown in Fig. 8(e). At this stage, the analysis stopped due
to the numerical instability caused by necking of exterior bolts.
Fig. 23(a) and (b) illustrate the deformed shape of the proposed me-
chanical joint (Specimen LC1) when the two exterior bolts fractured. In
Specimen LC1, strains in bolts were found to be as much as 0.11, which
is 22 times the yield strain of the bolt. The plates of Specimen LC1
(without interior bolts) were numerically separated from each other by
3 mm, as shown in Fig. 23(a). For Specimen LC1, the test failure modes
and numerical failure modes were similar. In Fig. 8(c) and (d), a de-
formation of 2–3 mm measured was well matched with the plate de-
formation, which was numerically calculated to be 3 mm (refer to
Fig. 23(a)). For Specimen LC2, interior bolts were more highly activated
compared to exterior bolts, as in Fig. 24(a) and (b). Strains in interior
bolts were seven times those in exterior bolts at a stroke of 54 mm (refer
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) A three-dimensional mesh; elements of types C3D8R and R3D4

(b) FE models

(c) Specimen layout

Fig. 18. Three-dimensional FE models for the proposed joint.

267
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong
Fig. 19. Definition of interactions between surfaces in contact.
to the load-displacement relationship in Legend 5 of Fig. 22(b)), in-
dicating that interior bolts significantly contributed to the flexural ca-
pacity of the joint. Microscopic analysis of the mechanical joint was
performed to determine the structural mechanism of the column-to-
column connections for precast concrete columns. Fig. 25 depicts the
location of the selected meshes of Specimen LC2 to evaluate the re-
sponse of the mechanical joints subjected to a monotonic load. FE
models were calibrated against test data, and their results were com-
pared with the test data at the microscopic level. Table 4 (Specimen
LC3-WF) compares numerical and test results at concrete strains of
0.0022 and 0.01, whereas Tables 5 and 6 compare numerical and test
data at concrete strains of 0.003 and 0.01. In this study, a concrete
strain of 0.003 was the design limit, while a concrete strain of 0.01 was
the ultimate strain value of the concrete. Table 4 compares the ex-
perimental and numerical results for the monolithic column with the
foundation (Specimen LC3-WF), and the contribution of each structural
element, including rebars and L-shaped steel, to the flexural capacity of
the mechanical joint is presented. Strains in rebars and steels based on
the developed FE models were well matched with test data at a concrete
strain of 0.0022. Activation of structural elements comprising the me-
chanical joint is presented in Tables 5 and 6, in which metal plates
having no interior bolts (Specimen LC1-WF, Table 6) demonstrated
larger strains, indicating that these metal plates underwent large
268
Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277
deformations during the analysis. The numerical results showed that
the upper column plate of Specimen LC2-WF (with interior bolts,
Table 5) exhibited a tensile strain of 0.0014, while that of Specimen
LC1-WF demonstrated a tensile strain of 0.006. In addition, L-shaped
steel sections welded to the plates of Specimen LC2-WF having interior
bolts were more highly activated than those of Specimen LC1-WF
having no interior bolts. However, a much higher tensile strain was
exerted on the exterior bolts in LC1-WF without interior bolts than in
those in LC2-WF.
6. Conclusions
This study was performed to experimentally verify the structural
performance and failure modes of the mechanical joints for “L”-shaped
precast concrete-based columns. Among the three test specimens, two
were designed with metal plates at the joints, while the remaining
specimen was designed as a conventional monolithic steel-concrete
column. Extensive steel sections and rebars were embedded in the
foundation reinforced by two layers of carbon sheets laid perpendicular
to each other. The load was applied at 1.7 m and 2.785 m from the joint
level and top of the foundation, respectively. The main failures with
energy dissipation and ductility were observed at the column, not on
the foundation. The following recommendations are suggested for the
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

Fig. 20. Definitions of constraints; embedded elements and boundary conditions.

(a) Specimen LC1 (without interior bolts)

(b) Specimen LC2 (with interior bolts)

Fig. 21. Deformations of metal plates at a concrete compressive strain of 0.003.

269
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Concrete damaged plasticity model

(b) Numerical and test results of the tested specimens (LC1~LC3)

Fig. 22. Numerical investigation validated by test data (LC1 ∼ LC3).

design of mechanical plates including columns and precast joints.
(1) Effective column splicing of L-type irregular precast columns
L-shaped precast columns are preferred over conventional rectan-
gular columns due to their architectural flexibility at the corners of the
walls in residential buildings. The structural performance with the
capability for efficient and effortless assembly of precast columns with
irregular sections was found sufficient to replace rectangular columns
that do not fit at the corners.
to the flexural capacity of the test specimens. Microscopic strains of the
elements influencing the structural behavior of the joint were identified
numerically. The lower metal plates for specimens without interior
bolts demonstrated large tensile strains of 0.018, whereas tensile strains
were substantially reduced to 0.007 in specimens with interior bolts.
The stiffness of the metal plates was responsible for activation of the
column rebars, indicating that the joint stiffness for the mechanical
joint was influenced by the stiffness of the metal plate. The use of in-
terior bolts with metal plates effectively increased the stiffness of the
mechanical joint, leading to increased tensile rebar strains.

(2) Stiffness of the mechanical metal plates effectively enhanced by (3) Effective activation of structural components by increased plate
interior bolts stiffness

Extensive strain data were collected and analyzed to explore the Tensile strains of the column rebars were lowest in the specimen
contribution of each structural element composing the mechanical joint without interior bolts due to the large deformations occurring at the

270
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Plate deformation

(b) Necking of exterior bolts

Fig. 23. Failure mode of Specimen LC1 (without interior bolts).

metal plates, whereas tensile strains of the specimen with interior bolts
significantly contributed to the flexural capacity. Rebar tensile strains
reached as high as 0.0068 in the monolithic specimen, while the tensile
strain was between 0.001 and 0.002 in the specimen with metal plates
without interior bolts. The use of thicker plates can also contribute to
increased stiffness of the proposed mechanical joint, helping to create a
rigid joint. However, an efficient way to obtain a flexural capacity that
is as large as possible is to provide interior bolts.
(4) Hysteretic energy dissipation capacities
Hysteretic energy dissipation capacities were compared for all three
specimens. The in-elastically dissipated energy of the specimen with
metal plates was lowest when interior bolts were absent. The me-
chanical joint reinforced with interior bolts was able to dissipate energy
similar to the conventional monolithic column. Mechanical joints with
sufficient stiffness provided by interior bolts also produced a flexural
capacity similar to that of the monolithic steel-concrete column.
(5) Splicing using column plates
The joints presented in this study are useful to contribute to rapid
erection of precast concrete-based frames of irregular shapes, resulting
in a significant shortening of the construction period. The most bene-
ficial finding of this study is that the conventional use of a grouted
sleeve for the splicing of precast columns can be replaced. Bolting
through metal plates and the involved labor on site are not expensive
compared to hiring site labor for cast-in-place concrete construction
(including installing pour forms, placing steels/rebars, casting concrete,
and removing pour forms after curing). This would also lead to a more

271
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Strains in interior bolts

(b) Stress-strain relationships of interior and exterior bolts

Fig. 24. Activation of interior bolts of Specimen LC2.

Fig. 25. Selected meshes for the microscopic analysis of the proposed mechanical joint of Specimen LC2.

272
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

Table 4
Strains of the proposed column connection identified from Legends 1 and 4 of Fig. 22(b); monolithic specimen (LC3-WF).
Legends 1 and 4 of Fig. 22(b) FEA results (Legend 4) Test results (Legend 1)

Concrete strain of 0.0022/0.003 Concrete strain of 0.01 Concrete strain of 0.0022 Concrete strain of 0.01

Load 569 kN/637 kN 743 kN 760 kN Strain gauge malfunctioned

Displacement 33 mm/41 mm 62.1 mm 90.6 mm Strain gauge malfunctioned

Concrete Strain 0.0022/0.003 0.01 0.0022 Strain gauge malfunctioned

Stress 26 MPa/29 MPa 13 MPa Not measured Not measured

Rebar (Average) Strain 0.0029/0.0035 0.0056 0.0023 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(0.9 y )/(1.2 y ) (1.8 y ) (0.7 y )
Stress 607 MPa/660 MPa 660 MPa Not measured Not measured

Steel (Average) Strain 0.0025/0.0028 0.005 0.00251 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(1.3 y )/(1.6 y ) (2.6 y ) (1.3 y )
Stress 430 MPa/431 MPa 450 MPa Not measured Not measured

Table 5
Strains of the proposed column connection identified from Legends 2 and 5 of Fig. 22(b); specimen with interior bolts (LC2-WF).
Legends 2 and 5 of Fig. 22(b) FEA results (Legend 5) Test results (Legend 2)

Concrete strain of 0.003 Concrete strain of 0.01 Concrete strain of 0.003 Concrete strain of 0.01

Load 435 kN 596 kN 500 kN Strain gauge malfunctioned

Displacement 26 mm 54 mm 100 mm Strain gauge malfunctioned

Concrete Strain 0.003 0.012 0.003 Strain gauge malfunctioned

Stress 26 MPa 7 MPa Not measured Not measured

Rebar (Average) Strain 0.0017 0.006 0.0013 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(0.5 y ) (3 y ) (0.4 y )
Stress 440 MPa 530 MPa Not measured Not measured

Steel (Average) Strain 0.002 0.006 0.0012 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(1 y ) (1.6 y ) (0.4 y )
Stress 490 MPa 550 MPa Not measured Not measured

Upper plate Strain 0.00141 0.0033 0.0069 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(0.4 y ) (1.7 y ) (3.6 y )
Stress 318 MPa 452 MPa Not measured Not measured
Deformation 0.31 mm 0.67 mm Not measured Not measured

Lower plate Strain 0.00138 0.0031 0.0072 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(0.7 y ) (1.7 y ) (3.8 y )
Stress 317 MPa 447 MPa Not measured Not measured
Deformation 0.4 mm 0.7 mm Not measured Not measured

Exterior bolt Strain 0.002 0.005 Not measured Strain gauge malfunctioned
(0.4 y ) (0.4 y )
Stress 478 MPa 1005 MPa Not measured Not measured

Interior bolts Strain 0.009 0.027 Not measured Strain gauge malfunctioned
(2 y ) (5 y )
Stress 1015 MPa 1005 MPa Not measured Not measured

economical option than the conventional ones in terms of carbon
emissions. The construction cost is even higher when the construction
industry experiences labor shortage issues.
(6) Design recommendations
The three specimens demonstrated identical initial stiffness be-
fore the metal plates started deforming. However, achieving flexural
capacity of columns with mechanical joints via plate stiffness without
interior stiffeners similar to that of the monolithic columns is not a
practical option. The use of interior bolts providing additional plate
stiffness would effectively enhance the stiffness and ductility of the
mechanical joint for columns with irregular shapes to a level similar
to that of a monolithic steel-concrete column. This study re-
commends the use of a sufficient number of interior bolts rather than
thicker plates to achieve a specific structural capacity. The number of
bolts is determined based on tension-compression couples exerted on
the plates, making the mechanical joints rigid. The design of bolts
follows AISC code, which defines distances between the bolts and
edges.

273
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

Table 6
Strains of the proposed column connection identified from Legends 3 and 6 of Fig. 22(b); specimen without interior bolts (LC1-WF).
Legends 3 and 6 of Fig. 22(b) FEA results (Legend 6) Test results (Legend 3)

Concrete strain of 0.003 Concrete strain of 0.01 Concrete strain of 0.003 Concrete strain of 0.01

Load 440 kN 527 kN 500 kN Strain gauge malfunctioned

Displacement 36.4 mm 60 mm 77 mm Strain gauge malfunctioned

Concrete Strain 0.003 0.013 0.003 Strain gauge malfunctioned

Stress 28.4 MPa 8 MPa Not measured Not measured

Rebar (Average) Strain 0.0024 0.0041 0.0021 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(0.8 y ) (1.3 y ) (0.7 y )
Stress 346 MPa 630 MPa Not measured Not measured

Steel (Average) Strain 0.0016 0.0038 0.0014 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(0.8 y ) (2 y ) (0.7 y )
Stress 416 MPa 506 MPa Not measured Not measured

Upper plate Strain 0.006 0.013 0.0022 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(3 y ) (7 y ) (1 y )
Stress 463 MPa 470 MPa Not measured Not measured
Deformation 1.4 mm 4.4 mm Not measured Not measured

Lower plate Strain 0.007 0.015 0.0068 Strain gauge malfunctioned

(5 y ) (5 y ) (5 y )
Stress 464 MPa 472 MPa Not measured Not measured
Deformation 1.5 mm 4.7 mm Not measured Not measured

Exterior bolt Strain 0.028 0.09 Not measured Not measured

(6 y ) (18 y )
Stress 1037 MPa 827 MPa Not measured Not measured

Acknowledgements the Ministry of Education (NRF-2016R1D1A1A02937558). This work

was also supported by the Business for Cooperative R&D between
This work was supported by the Basic Science Research Program Industry, Academy, and Research Institute funded by the Korea Small
through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by and Medium Business Administration in 2016 (Grant No. C0398455).

Appendix

Design of the proposed precast column joints

(1) Design of high-rise buildings with multi-bay L-type composite precast frames

Fig. A-1 describes a multi-bay frame with the proposed L-type composite precast frames having mechanical joints for a selected 20-story
apartment building. The L-shaped columns provided architectural flexibility at the corners, similar to that of wall frames, replacing structural walls
with dry partitions and saving substantial amounts of concrete and construction time. The load demands for the design in terms of moment (Mu),
shear (Vu), and axial forces (Pu) were obtained based on three-dimensional dynamic analysis and are presented in Table A-1; these must be resisted
by the proposed mechanical joints.

Fig. A-1. A 20-story apartment building with L-type composite precast columns.

274
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

Table A-1
Load demands for the design.
Columns Mux Muy Pu
355 kN m 349 kN m 11,680 kN

Girders Mu Vu
238.2 kN m 216.6 kN

(2) Design of the columns with precast joints; determining nominal strength at a concrete strain of 0.003 based on the concrete mesh under average
compression

A numerical investigation was conducted to verify the design of the proposed precast frame. The distribution of strains at the composite column
section is explored in Fig. A-2 to determine the nominal strength based on a concrete strain of 0.003. The neutral axis was determined based on the
meshes with average compression and maximum compression, as shown Fig. A-2(a) and (b), respectively.
The strain distributions of the mechanical joints at a concrete column strain of 0.003, which were identified based on the concrete meshes under
average compression, are exhibited in Fig. A-3. As shown in Fig. A-3(a), the nominal flexural and shear capacities of the L-shaped column were
1175.3 kN-m and 691 kN, respectively, based on a concrete strain of 0.003. This strain value was identified based on the concrete meshes under
average compression in the columns without interior bolts (Specimen LC1) at an axial force of 5000 kN. Punching shear stresses of 318.7 MPa around
the neck of the counterbores at 0.003 are also obtained in Fig. A-3(b). The structural behavior at joints was ensured by the strain analysis based on
numerical investigation.

(1) Strains of columns ( =1175.3 kN·m) (2)Strains of girders (200x400 mm, =208kN•m,
200x500 mm, =311 kN·m)
(a) Based on concrete mesh at the average compression (Specimen LC1)

(1) Strains of columns ( =1144.5 kN·m) (2) Strains of girders (200x400 mm, =239.4 kN·m)

(b) Based on concrete mesh at the maximum compression (Specimen LC1)

Fig. A-2. Neutral axis with an axial force of 5000 kN.

(3) Strain evolutions of the mechanical joints

The moment-displacement relationship of the columns with an axial force of 5000 kN is presented in Fig. A-4. The flexural moment capacity
corresponding to a concrete strain of 0.003, marked by a red dot, showed that the monolithic columns (moment-displacement relationship by Legend
1) delivered the greatest moment strength. The use of interior bolts increased the moment strength (moment-displacement relationship by Legend 2)

275
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277

(a) Strains at the mechanical joints of the L-shaped column

(b) Punching shear stresses and shear strength at the neck of the counterbore
Fig. A-3. Nominal strength at a concrete strain of 0.003 (refer to Fig. A-2 based on average strains).

compared to that without interior bolts (moment-displacement relationship by Legend 3). However, these three columns provided similar moment
strengths at Mu, indicating that the mechanical joint with a laminated metal plate offered sufficient flexural capacity for a given load demand. The
proposed joint can replace columns with monolithic joints for the loading combination. The influence of the joint details on the flexural capacity of
the proposed connection was explored in Fig. A-3. The strains exerted on the column joints are identified in Fig. A-3. The vertical rebars were
connected directly onto the 30-mm-thick metal plates. The average strains in the upper and lower plates were negligible; εt = 0.0015 (average, 0.94
εy) at the moment corresponding to a concrete strain of 0.003 (1175.3 kN-m), as shown in Fig. A-3(a). The strain of the vertical rebars was 0.0026
(0.89 εy,) at the moment corresponding to a concrete strain of 0.003.

276
J.D. Nzabonimpa, W.-K. Hong
Fig. A-4. Moment-displacement relationship of columns at an axial force of 5000 kN.
References
[1] Elliot KS. Precast concrete structures. Crc Press; 2016.
[2] Guan D, Guo Z, Xiao Q, Zheng Y. Experimental study of a new beam-to-column
connection for precast concrete frames under reversal cyclic loading. Adv Struct Eng
2016;19(3):529–45.
[3] Clementi F, Scalbi A, Lenci S. Seismic performance of precast reinforced concrete
buildings with dowel pin connections. J Build Eng 2016;7:224–38.
[4] Nzabonimpa JD, Hong WK, Kim J. Mechanical connections of the precast concrete
columns with detachable metal plates. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 2017;26(17).
[5] Cheok GS, Lew HS. Model precast concrete beam-to-column connections subject to
cyclic loading. PCI J 1993;38(4):80–92.
[6] Birkeland PW, Birkeland HW. Connections in precast concrete construction. J Proc
1966;63(3):345–68.
[7] Choi HK, Choi YC, Choi CS. Development and testing of precast concrete beam-to-
column connections. Eng Struct 2013;56:1820–35.
[8] Negro P, Bournas DA, Molina FJ. Pseudodynamic tests on a full-scale 3-storey
precast concrete building: global response. Eng Struct 2013;57:594–608.
[9] Bournas DA, Negro P, Molina FJ. Pseudodynamic tests on a full-scale 3-storey
precast concrete building: behavior of the mechanical connections and floor dia-
phragms. Eng Struct 2013;57:609–27.
[10] Hu JY, Hong WK, Park SC. Experimental investigation of precast concrete based dry
mechanical column–column joints for precast concrete frames. Struct Des Tall Spec
Build 2017;26(5).
[11] Thambiratnam DP, Paramasivam P. Base plates under axial loads and moments. J
Struct Eng 1986;112(5):1166–81.
[12] Ermopoulos JC, Stamatopoulos GN. Analytical modelling of column-base plates
under cyclic loading. J Constr Steel Res 1996;40(3):225–38.
277
Engineering Structures 185 (2019) 243–277
[13] Baniotopoulo CC, Abdalla KM. Sensitivity analysis results on the separation pro-
blem of bolted steel column-to-column connections. Int J Solids Struct
1995;32(2):251–65.
[14] Fang C, Yam MC, Lam AC, Xie L. Cyclic performance of extended end-plate con-
nections equipped with shape memory alloy bolts. J Constr Steel Res
2014;94:122–36.
[15] Shi G, Shi Y, Wang Y. Behaviour of end-plate moment connections under earth-
quake loading. Eng Struct 2007;29(5):703–16.
[16] Wang J, Chen L. Experimental investigation of extended end plate joints to con-
crete-filled steel tubular columns. J Constr Steel Res 2012;79:56–70.
[17] Seckin M, Fu HC. Beam-column connections in precast reinforced concrete con-
struction. Struct J 1990;87(3):252–61.
[18] Alcocer SM, Carranza R, Perez-Navarrete D, Martinez R. Seismic tests of beam-to-
column connections in a precast concrete frame. PCI J 2002;47(3):70–89.
[19] Xiao J, Ding T, Pham TL. Seismic performance of precast recycled concrete frame
structure. ACI Struct J 2015;112(4):515.
[20] Maggi YI, Gonçalves RM, Leon RT, Ribeiro LFL. Parametric analysis of steel bolted
end plate connections using finite element modeling. J Constr Steel Res
2005;61(5):689–708.
[21] Nzabonimpa JD, Hong WK, Kim J. Nonlinear finite element model for the novel
mechanical beam-column joints of precast concrete-based frames. Comput Struct
2017;189:31–48.
[22] AISC. AISC 358‐05, IL 2005. Prequalified Connections for Special and Intermediate
Steel Moment Frames for Seismic Applications, American Institute of Steel
Construction, Chicago.
[23] ABAQUS Analysis User’s Manual 6.14-2. Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp.,
Providence, RI, USA.
[24] Park R, Paulay T. Reinforced concrete structures. John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1975.