Cgna14428enc 001 PDF

Commission of the European Communities
technical steel researc

Properties and service performance
Seismic resistance of composite structures

SRCS

Commission of the European Communities
Properties and service performance
Seismic resistance of composite structures

SRCS
Department manager
J.B. Schleich
Ingnieur civil des constructions
Chef de service
Project manager
R. Pepin
Ingnieur diplm EPFZ
Service recherches et promotion techniques structures
(RPS)
Arbedrecherches
66, rue de Luxembourg
L4002 Esch/AIzette
Contract No 7210SA/506
(1.7.198731.12.1990)
Final report
DirectorateGeneral
Science, Research and Development
1992
PARL EURCP. Dbioth.

N.C.
C1.
EUR
14428 EN
Published by the
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Directorate-General
Information Technologies and Industries, and Telecommunications
L-2920 Luxembourg
LEGAL NOTICE
Neither the Commission of the European Communities nor any person
acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might
be made of the following information
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1992

ISBN 92-826-4667-X
ECSC-EEC-EAEC, Brussels Luxembourg, 1992
Printed in Luxembourg
CONFIDENTIAL
Title of Research:
Seismic Resistance of Composite Structures

(S.R.C.S.)
Agreement :
N7210-SA/506
Executive Committee:
F6
Commencement of Research:
01.07.1987
1 st Scheduled Completion Date: 30.06.1990

Extended Completion Date:
31.12.1990
Beneficiary:
ARBED-Luxembourg
Technical Support:
Service Ponts et Charpentes, Universit de Lige

(B)
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Strutturale, Politecnico
di Milano (I)
Institut fr Stahlbau und Werkstoffmechanik,
Technische Hochschule Darmstadt (D)
Lehrstuhl fr Baustofftechnologie und
Brandschutz, Bergische Universitt Wuppertal (D)
Software Developments:
Lehrstuhl fr Stahlbau, RWTH Aachen (D)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
During over three and a half year, five E uropean universities collaborated with an
European steel producer in order to analyze the behaviour of composite structures
under earthquake action from a common E uropean point of view. This international
cooperation, which in our minds gives already a taste what can be the E uropean
Community of tomorrow, became only possible by the generous sponsorship of
C.E.C., the Commission of the European Community.
Therefore, we want to acknowledge first of all the important financial support from
the Commission of the E uropean Community, as well as the moral support given to
this research by the E CSC E xecutive Committee F6 "Steel Structures", former
committee F8 "Light Weight Structures".
Special thanks are due to the scientific contributors to this research, namely:
Prof. SE DLACE K, Dipl. Ing. KUCK and Dipl. Ing. HOFFME ISTE R from
the RWTH Aachen
Prof. BOUWKAMP, Dipl. Ing. SCHNEIDER and Dipl. Ing. KANZ from the
TH Darmstadt,
Dr. Ir. PLUMIER and Dipl. Ing. TUNHUS from the University of Lige,
Prof. BALLIO from the Politecnico di Milano and
Prof. KLINGSCH, Dipl. Ing. HAMME and Dipl. Ing. KOENIG from the BU
Wuppertal.
Thanks to their experience in the field of seismic action, fire action and composite
structures, it was possible to analyze the cohabitation of these three factors. As most
of the participants are also involved very closely in the elaboration of E uropean
standards and guidelines, there is a serious hope that the results obtained during
this research will not end in a lonely drawer, but will be taken into account within
these standards.
We also wish to record our appreciation of the efforts and cooperation of the
laboratories in Darmstadt, Lige, Milan and Wuppertal, which executed the 50 tests
with an excellent knowledge and experience, as well as of the workshops involved in
the fabrication of the test specimens and the testing installations.
Finally, thanks are due to all, who by any means may have contributed tothe success
of the present research.
-v-
Research: "SEISMIC RE SISTANCE OF COMPOSITE STRUCTURES"

Agreement 7210-SA/506 C.E.C. - ARBED
SUMMARY
The first period of this research was devoted to the realization of nearly quasi-static
cyclic 50 tests on full sized composite specimen which may be divided in four series:
Series 1 :
tests on T-shaped exterior column/beam joints
Series 2:
tests on cross-shaped interior columns/beam joints
Series 3:
tests on complete frames
Series 4:
partial tests on different elements
During each of these series different types of connections were analyzed. As the
series were realized successively, the specimens could be continously improved.
Several tests realized in series 3 are among the biggest ones ever realized in
Europe.
A second period allowed to develop a numerical code, which can simulate concrete
structures under seismic action by taking into account geometrical non-linearities as
well as the elasto-plastic behaviour of steel and the deterioration of concrete.
The present research showed that it is interesting of using composite structures in
earthquake prone zones, as
concrete increases the resistance by about 50% in the elastic field
concrete increases the stiffness
concrete largely prevents local buckling
concrete contributes to the shear panel behaviour
after complete concrete crushing the structure behaves always like a
bare steel structure when submitted to very large displacements
VII -
Projet de recherche:
"LA RE SISTANCE SISMIQUE DE S CONSTRUCTIONS

MIXTES ACIER/BETON"
Contrat 7210-SA/506 C.C.E. - ARBED
RESUME
Durant la premire phase de la recherche, environ 50 essais cycliques
quasi-statiques ont t raliss sur des chantillons mixtes acier/bton grandeur
nature. Ces essais peuvent tre diviss en 4 sries:
srie 1 :
essais sur joints poutre/colonne extrieure en forme de
srie 2:
essais sur joints poutre/colonne intrieure en forme de

croix
srie 3:
essais sur portiques entiers
srie 4:
essais sur divers sous-assemblages.
Durant chacune de ces sries, diffrents types d'assemblage furent analyss. E tant
donn que les sries se suivaient en ordre chronologique, il tait possible de tenir
des amliorations dcides suite aux insuffisances constates. Certains des essais
raliss en srie 3 doivent tre compts parmi les plus grands essais jamais raliss
en Europe.
Une seconde phase de la recherche a permis de dvelopper un code numrique
capable de simuler le comportement des structures mixtes acier/bton sous action
sismique en tenant compte aussi bien des non-linarits gomtriques que des
non-linarits matrielles, telles que la dgradation du bton et le comportement
lasto-plastique de l'acier.
La recherche en question a montr l'intrt d'utiliser des structures mixtes en zones
sismiques, vu que
le bton augmente la rsistance d'environ 50% en domaine lastique
le bton augmente la rigidit de la structure
le bton empche largement les instabilits locales telles que le
vouement
le bton participe activement la rsistance du panneau de
cisaillement
aprs la destruction totale du bton, la structure garde toujours les
proprits d'une structure en acier pur et ceci mme pour des
dplacements excessifs non ralistes en pratique.
-VIII -
Forschungsprojekt:
"ERDBEBENSICHERHEIT
KONSTRUKTIONEN"
VON
VERBUND
Forschungsauftrag 7210SA/506 K.EG. ARBED
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG
In einer ersten Phase wurden ca. 50 Versuche an Verbundprfkrpern im Massstab
1:1 durchgefhrt. Diese Versuche lassen sich in vier Klassen einteilen:
Reihe 1 :
Versuche
an
Verbindungen
Reihe 2:
Versuche
an
Tfrmigen
Aussensttze/Trger
kreuzfrmigen
Innensttze/Trger
Verbindungen
Reihe 3:
Versuche an vollstndigen Rahmensystemen
Reihe 4:
Versuche an verschiedenen zustzlichen Anschlssen
Whrend jeder dieser Reihen wurden verschiedene Anschlusstypen analysiert. Da

die Versuchsreihen sich zeitlich folgten, war es mglich Verbesserungsvorschlge
aus vorhergehenden Versuchen zu bercksichtigen. Einige der Versuche in Reihe 3
zhlen zu den grssten Versuchen die je in Europa durchgefhrt wurden.
Ein zweiter Schritt galt der Entwicklung eines numerischen Modells, das es
ermglichte Verbundkonstruktionen unter Erdbebenbelastung rechnerisch zu
erfassen. Hierbei werden sowohl Verformungsanteile zweiter Ordnung als auch
materielles nicht lineares Verhalten wie Betonzerstrung und Stahlfliessen
bercksichtigt.
Das vorliegende Forschungsprojekt zeigte, dass die Anwendung
Verbundkonstruktionen in Erdbebengebieten durchaus interessant ist, da
von
der Beton die Tragfhigkeit der Struktur um bis zu 50% im elastischen

Bereich erhht
der Beton zu grsseren Steifigkeiten fhrt
der Beton lokale Instabilitten wie Beulen teilweise behindert
der Beton
mitbeitrgt
massgeblich
zum
Tragverhalten
des
Schubpanels
nach der Zerstrung des Betons, die Struktur sich weiterhin wie eine
reine Stahlkonstruktion verhlt und dies auch unter sehr grossen
Verformungen
IX
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PARTI
Acknowledgements
III
Summary
IV
Contents
VII
2
3
Introduction
1.1
General reflexions
1.2
Aims of the research project
Definition of the test series
Test series 1
3.1
Selection of the joints to test
3.2
Testing installation and measurement devices
3.3
Major results
3.4
Improvements deduced for series 2 and 3
3.5
Effect of flange weakening on the fire resistance
Test series 2
4.1
Selection of the test specimen
4.2
Testing installation
4.3
Major results
Test series 3
5.1
The Lige specimens
5.2
The Wuppertal specimens
5.3
The Darmstadt specimens
5.4
Design of the testing installations for series 3
5.4.1. The Lige installation
5.4.1. The Wuppertal installation
5.4.1. The Darmstadt installation
5.5
Definition of the measurements in series 3
5.5.1. Measurements of displacements
5.5.2. Measurements of loads and internal forces
Numerical computer code
6.1
Introduction
6.2
Additional requirements to a simulation program
6.2.1. Nonlinear material behaviour
6.2.2. Geometrical nonlinearities
XI
1
1
2
3
7
7
14
21
23
23
27
27
30
31
33
33
34
35
36
36
37
37
39
40
40
43
43
44
44
44
6.2.3. Shear forces

6.2.4. Load history and strength degradation
6.2.5. Short calculation time
6.2.6. Additional requirements
6.3
Implementation of the requires features
6.3.1. Nonlinear material behaviour
6.3.2. Geometrical nonlineahties
6.3.3. Modelling of the beam-to-column and shear panel
6.3.4. Load history and strength degradation
6.3.5. Short calculation time
6.3.6. Additional features
6.4 E xamples of calculation
6.4.1. Simulation of the beam-to-column connection tests
6.4.2. Cyclic behaviour of a frame
6.4.3. Frame under earthquake action
Recommendations from the amendment and complexion of EC 8
44
44
44
44
45
45
47
47
48
51
51
51
51
53
53
57
Recommendations to improve ECCS document 45

8.1
Introduction
8.2
Proposed modifications
9 E conomic interest of using composite structures
59
59
60
65
10
69
69
70
71
71
Conclusions
10.1 General remarks
10.2 Standards and recommendations
10.3 Designproblems
10.4 Manufacturing and quality insurance problems
Bibliography
73
PART II
Appendix A Test report of the Milan laboratory
75
Appendix Test report of the Lige laboratory
201
Appendix C Test report of the Wuppertal laboratory
279
Appendix D Test report of the Darmstadt laboratory
339
Appendix E Material lists from comparing concrete to

composite structures
441
-XII
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. General reflexions

On the average, about 10.000 people are killed every year world-wide by
earthquakes [1], and the actual trend is still going on (figure 1.1.). No country in the
world is absolutely insured against seismic shocks. According to an UNE SCO
analysis, the material losses reached $ 10.000.000.000 between 1926 and 1950.
Since then, cities like Agadir (Morocco), Skopje (Yugoslavia), Managua (Nicaragua),
Mexico City (Mexico), Spitaka (USSR) and Tangshan (China) have been completely
or mostly destroyed during cataclysms.
1.000.000
TANGSHAN
MESSINA
t
KANSU t
100,000
<
MEAN
Q
CC
LU
10,000
1.000
100
1390
1900
1910
'920
1930
YEAR
1910
1950
1960
1970
1980
'
Figure 1.1: Human losses due to earthquakes
Most of these structural damages are due to the use of non-ductile materials as
concrete or masonry, which are often even of a poor quality. On the other hand, bare
steel structures, which in general have excellent ductility capacities, are too
expensive to compete with local traditional building methods. They also require most
1-1
of the time on adequate fire protection in order to resist the fires following in general
an earthquake.
In that case, composite structures offer a good compromise between tradition and
safety: They are more ductile than reinforced concrete structures, yet they are stiffer
and less prove to buckling than steel structures [2] and they have very good fire
resistance properties. Very often composite buildings are erected by concrete
contractors. Unfortunately up to nowadays composite structures in aseismic design
were only used in Japan as concrete encased structures.
1.2. Aims of the research project

The present report deals with composite structures based on hot rolled steel
sections where the chamber between the beam flanges is concreted (figures 1.2.)
like it is mostly done in European regions. The aim of the project was to prove that
this type of structure has inherent aseismic properties besides the given fire
resistance qualities and that the earthquake resistance can even be increased by an
adequate design of the assemblies. A solution where the rebars would have been
formed and located as in figure 1.3, would of course give a better aseismic
behaviour, but in that case fire resistance will be largely decreased. On the other
side, former pretests [3] had shown, that the seismic resistance of the elements was
sufficient, but that the critical point of the system was the resistance of the
assemblies.
The approximately 50 full scale tests allowed to develop a non-linear software called
DYNACS for the aseismic design of composite structures, which is also described in
the present report.
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.3
1-2
Chapter 2
DEFINITION OF THE TEST SERIES
Several tests realized in Milan before 1987 on composite columns [3] have shown a
good behaviour when comparing the results to those obtained on equivalent bare
steel columns:
the stiffness of the structure was increased
the elastic moment was considerably higher for the composite
specimens
the local buckling of the steel section flanges was largely restrained
due to the presence of concrete poured between the flanges, avoiding
this way clearly low cycle fatigue failure.
As the structural elements seemed to be alright, the main effort was then devoted to
the design of the connections. This item was of a crucial importance, as:
joints designed for fire resistance and/or for normal static loads are not
necessary automatically resistant to cyclic loads
hinges and semi-rigid connections lead
to higher inter-storey drift when
submitted to horizontal forces, inducing
by that way higher second order effects,
called also - effects.
Figure 2.1: AF-column
2-1
Among the various types of composite

sections, the AF-system (figure 2.1.) was
retained for testing, as it is one of the most
popular E uropean composite building
system. The AF (anti-fire) system was
developed by ARBE D in collaboration with
Prof. JUNGBLUTH from the Technical
University of Darmstadt (D) [4],[5]. The
AF-technology
offers
a
good
fire
resistance, while showing the steel profiles
and without loosing the advantages of
steel structures for connections for
instance. The total weight of this kind of
structures is smaller than for a reinforced -
concrete structure and the dimensions of the different elements are also reduced.
Further developments [6] on the original system led to the creation of an universal
fire-resistant composite system and to the elaboration of an adequate numerical
computer code called CE FICOSS, calibrated by 15 full-scale fire tests. By these
means, ARBED was well positioned to realize the present research work on the given
AF-system.
The tests to be realized were divided in three series:
test series 1 :
18 tests on exterior beam-to-column joints formed by a

column and one beam (figure 2.2.)
test series 2:
20 tests on interior beam-to-column joints formed by a

column and two in-plane beams (figure 2.3.)
test series 3:
10 tests on more complex structures like frames (figure

2.4.).
ti
Series 1 ai Milan
(18 tests)
Figure 2.2
Series 2 at Milan
(20 tests)
Figure 2.3
This choice was made for the following reasons:

Most the work had to be done on joint design, therefore there was no
bigger need to test complete structures.
Nevertheless, some complete structures had to be analyzed in order to
check the numerical computer code developed at the same time and to
control interference between different modes.
Tests on connections are less expensive than frame tests.
Frame tests are not without problems from the point of view of erection,
in-situ concreting and demolition after testing.
For test series 1, a complete test set-up existed in Milan, which could
be used without any major modifications.
2-2
^.
- ^
* j
^"
"
\f
* 1
i
t.
Series 3 at Lige
13 tests

=*
i]
Series 3 at Darmstadt
(3 tests)
Series 3 at Wupp3 rial

(4 tests)
Figure 2.4: Different types of frames tested in series 3
In addition to the mentioned test series, a test series 4, dealing with partial tests
became necessary (figure 2.5.). This series was composed by 5 tests on a single
column and on the nodes of the frames not tested during the previous tests. In fact it
was necessary to determine the momentrotation behaviour of every single element,
before it is possible to simulate numerically the global behaviour of a frame.
2 tests
L.J
2 tests
|1 test
Figure 2.5: Elements tested in series 4
23
While test series 1 and 2 were realized in Milan, test series 3 was divided between
Darmstadt, Lige and Wuppertal. Series 4 was done in Darmstadt, as the nodes to
be tested corresponded all to the Darmstadt frames.
All the tests were realized on full-scale specimen, as it is very difficult to simulate the
behaviour of non-heterogenous structures like composite ones on reduced scale
models (for instance half-scale as it is often used in seismic engineering).
Regarding the testing procedure, a cyclic but quasi-static loading was chosen as this
is the most convenient method when testing both connection and frames. The tests
were carried out according to the relative ECCS procedures [7]. These guide-lines
allowed to obtain comparable results at the different testing sites. The design of the
specimens was done according to Eurocode 3 [8] and Eurocode 8 [9]. In order to
show the benefit of composite structures each type of joint was also tested on a
reference bare steel specimen.
The sections used during the whole project were HEB 300 for columns, HEA 260 for
beams and slabs of 1000 mm width and 120 mm thickness. Steel grade was Fe 360
for structural steels and Fe 510 for plates while concrete used was of grade C25. All
the sections were designed according to the tables of [10] and [11].
2-4
Chapter 3
TEST SERIES 1
3.1. Selection of the joints to test

Originally, 21 types of connection were proposed for testing. After discussion, six
types named type A to F were retained, among which were as well bolted as welded
specimens. The characteristics of each type and of his derivations are given on the
following specification sheets. The choice of the specimens was made by the way to
obtain existing joints to be used occasionally together with other, more moment
resisting joints or with concrete cores or bracing; slightly modified joints and
completely new joints not yet used in the AF fire proof system.
Specimen of series 1 during testing
3-1
Figure:
Type:
Number of specimens:
Specifications
A1: - Composite specimen with slab anchored to the column
- Beam and column hold together by two pins welded
to the beam by fillet welds
- No stiffeners in the column
Remarks:
. Existing AF-joint
- Bare steel specimen or specimen without slab
not tested as they are completely hinged
- Good results in fire resistance
Specification sheet 1
3-2
Figure:
Type:
Specifications
B1: - Composite specimen with slab anchored
to the column
- Beam and column joined by web plate
with 4 bolts M27 10.9
- Semi-rigid joint
- No stiffeners in the column
Remarks:
Existing AF-joint
Practically hinged , therefore only
test with slab
Good behaviour in fire testing
3-3
Figure:
Type:
'1'
8
111
X
.....V.V.V...............................
WMA
fl
Specifications
Fully rigid design with column stiffeners

Web plate with 2 M20 10.9 bolts
for erection facilities
Flange plates welded to the column
in the workshop
Fillet weld platetobeam realized on site
Lower plate larger than beam
Upper plate smaller than beam
C1 : Bare steel specimen
C2 : Composite specimen without slab
C3 : Composite specimen with slab
Remarks:
Slightly modified joint
10
34
Figure:
Type:
Specifications
Bolted joint using 10.9 bolts or tendons for
an easier erection
Stiffening assured by classical stiffeners (bolts)
or by channels (tendons)
Semirigid and fullyrigid specimens with
endplates of 26mm respectively 44mm
fullrigid (8 bolts) .
tendons
bolta
tendons
tendons
bolts
steel channel
stiffeners
bare steel
AF without
slab
AFwith
slab
Remarks:
semirigid (4 bolts)
D1
D6
D4
PVC channel steel channel stiffeners
D2
tendons
+
PVC channel
D5
D7
D8
D3
Usual AFjoint with light improvements
35
11
Type:
Figure:
Specifications
- Welded fully rigid joint (fillet welds)
- Classical joint used in the United States
Column stiffeners used
No slab used
E1 : - bare steel specimen
E2 : - bare beam / composite column specimen
E3 : - composite specimen
Remarks:
- Welds to be realized on site
12
3-6
Type:
Figure:
" A
m^
Specifications
A-A
- Welded rigid joint (fillet welds)

- Beam weakened by flange cutting in order to
insure a plastic hinge in the beam and not
in the column or the joint
- Beam weakened by 20% in order to equalize
Eurocode 8 requirement ^ ^
1,2*^
- No stiffeners used
F1 : - Bare steel specimen
F2 : - Composite specimen without slab
Remarks:
- Completely new type of joint according to the

weak beam / strong column concept
3-7
13
3.2. Testing installation and measurement devices

The eighteen tests of series 1 were realized at the Structural E ngineering Department
of the Politecnio di Milano.
The equipment, which is able to test:
framed structures
truss braced structures
eccentric braced structures and
cantilever structures,
has the following characteristics:
equipment capable of applying horizontal cyclic actions in an
quasi-static way;
possible specimen size: 3.0 m approximately: forces F and
displacements varying within a range of +/- 100 kN and +/- 15 cm,
respectively; axial load of 800 kN approximately;
power jackscrews, which enable displacements to be assumed as
control parameters and, consequently, the unstable branches of the
structure's behaviour to be followed fairly gradually.
In addition, as axial loading is applied to specimens, in terms of axial strain, no
continual adjustment of its value is required as with hydraulically-operated systems.
The outcome is illustrated in Figure 3.1 as far as its main components are
concerned, whereas auxiliary components used to provide out of plane bracing to
the specimens are shown in Figure 3.2. Figure 3.3 schematically illustrates the basic
equipment with a specimen of series 1 on.
Its main components are the following:
a. foundation (Fig. 3.1a)
b. supporting girder (Fig. 3.1b)
c. counterframe (Fig. 3.1c)
d. main jack (Fig. 3.1 d)
e) axial - loading system (Fig. 3.1 e)
f) lateral bracing (Fig. 3.2)
g) measuring instruments
14
3-8
Figure 3.1: Main components of the testing set-up
****:
'.
TT
--
Figure 3.2: Out-of-plane bracing of the set-up
39
15
Figure 3.3: Basic equipment of series 1 set-up
a) Foundation
This is provided by the reinforced concrete slab which is part of the testing
apparatus available in the Laboratory of the Structural Engineering Department of
the Politecnico di Milano.
The slab is 1.50 m thick and is designed so as to withstand maximum bending
moments of 2000 kNm/m.
It is covered by a 20 mm thick steel plate connected to the concrete which serves
the purpose of evenly distributing and balancing horizontal forces. A series of
through holes, 180 mm in diameter, arranged so as to form equilateral triangles with
980 mm sides, provides for an adjustable anchorage of the equipment depending on
the individual needs.
b) Supporting girder
This 6,57 m long member acts as a mounting, specimen and axial-loading system
are bolted on. Its top flange is provided with a double row of 29 mm diameter holes
to fit in bolts 27 mm in diameter, equally spaced at 100 mm intervals, so as to make
a wide range of different mounting positions of the specimen and their supports
possible.
16
3-10
The cross girder is fastened to the foundation slab by means of four anchor bolts 60
mm in diameter and to the column of the counterframe through a 160 mm diameter
pin. It is also fitted with two jaws to clamp the cam of the axial-loading system.
c) C ounterframe
This consists cof one column and two truss systems inclined at 60 towards each
other (Fig. 3.1).
The column, 3.67 m high, is a welded asymmetric -profile, which both jacks
(applying alternate displacements and axial loading respectively) are fastened to.
A doubled row of 29 mm diameter holes equally spaced at 75 mm intervals is
provided on its inward flange to allow the jack to be positioned at the required
height.
Anchorage to the foundation slab is secured by means of one 100 mm diameter
anchor. Truss systems are jointed to the columns via end plate connections and to
the foundation slab by means of 60 mm anchor bolts. The frame is designed so that
its own deformability can only negligibly affect the test results.
d) Main jack
The power jackscrew displays a 100 kN capacity, a 300 mm stroke, a 1:35 screw
gear ratio and a 7 % efficiency. Worm screw is 120 mm in diameter. It is connected,
through a reduction gear, to a 3 KW motor. Feed rate is 1,7 cm/min.
e) Axial-loading system
The main function of this system is to cause specimens undergo axial deformation.
The jack hinged to the column has a 150 kN capacity, a 480 mm stroke and is driven
by a 0.55 kW motor which it is connected to by means of a reduction gear.
f) Lateral bracing
All along its sides, the equipment is provided with a bracing system specially
designed to prevent specimens lateral displacements (Fig. 3.2). This is made up to 8
uprights (4 on each side) fastened to the foundation. Two cross beams are clamped
to it, at the desired height, by means of stirrups.
These, in turn, support four plates. Specimens are equipped with two devices having
two hemispherical elements at their ends, the distance between which is adjusted so
that a contact with the plates is established. Both plates and spherical elements are
made of hardened steel and have perfectly smooth surfaces so as to minimize wear,
tear and friction.
3-11
17
g) Measuring Instruments
Throughout a cyclic test, at least the following must be measured continuously:
loading applied to the specimen;
one of its displacement components;
axial loading applied, if any.
Loading applied to the specimen is measured by means of a dynamometer (fig. 3.3)
which forms integral part of the equipment. This consists of a round bar connected
through a cylindrical hinge to the jack and through a spherical hinge to the
specimen. A strain gauge bridge is set in the middle of the bar.
The displacement component may be measured using the device shown in figure
3.4. A wire, having one end glued to the stressed specimen, winds around one of the
four races, different in diameter, of a pulley whose base is inclined with respect to its
axis. An inductive transducer lies parallel to this axis. As the transducer stroke (10
mm) is made equal to one complete turn of the pulley, four different amplifications of
the displacement component value are obtained. This allows to rapidly gear the
measurement system to the test features.
Trasduttori
Transducer
t,
Pisa
Wtighl
Ptso X
Wt 19M D
Figure 3.4
Signals sent out by the strain gauge bridge and by the transducer are taken up,
through two digital amplifiers, by an x-y recorder, thus making possible a real-time
control of the test in progress.
18
3-12
In case an axial loading is applied, this is measured by a 1000 kN Hottinger load cell
set between the counterpiece and the specimen. Readings are recorded through a
third digital amplifier.
The measurements taken during the tests are shown in figure 3.5.
Figure 3.5
These four measurements lead us to the following six terms of deformation (figure
3.6).
Plastic hinge deformation in the beam oh
Connection deformation 0c
Shear panel deformation in the column s
Elastic deformation of the beam Ob
Elastic deformation of the column 0Co
Settlement of the reaction system or
Only the three first terms describe phenomena which characterize the problem; the
other terms allow to evaluate properly the first three terms.
313
19
Plastic hinge deformation
Connection deformation
Sheared panel deformation
1/
r~~r
,
..\
/I
Elastic deformation of the beam E lastic deformation of the column Settlement of the reaction system
Figure 3.6: Terms of deformation
When analyzing the test results, by calculating the different values with,
s = R3 0co or
0c = R2 R3
0h = Di/L R3 0c 0b
one problem arises:
0h is becoming negative, which is physically impossible.
The reason for 0h being negative is the imperfect way in which the rotation at the
border between connection and beam is measured; rotation R2 includes a part of 0h.
This involves an overestimating of 0C (=R2R3) and an underestimating of 0h.
These imperfections are great enough to obtain 0h negative.
In order to bypass this problem, it was decided for the further considerations to mix
0h and 0c into a unique parameter 0p, called beam plastic deformation. This
parameter is estimated to be sufficient for the purpose of this research. Exact
measuurement of the factors 0h and 0c would require a different and more complex
system of measurements for R2.
20
314
Considering in the future p, extrapolation to other beam sections then HEA 260 will
nevertheless remain possible, as far as the geometrical properties of the shape do
not differ too much from those analyzed during the tests, which in general practice is
the case.
3.3. Major results

The results of series 1 as well as those of the other series are described in detail in
appendix A to D together with rvaluations of these results. Therefore only major
results will be summarized in this chapter.
Except for types C and D, the joints behaved as foreseen during the design step. All
the results obtained are summarized in table 3.1.
'
My
^2.5%
Mu
%
2.5%
rad
KNm
IO 5
KNm
KNm
KNm
Al
Bl
3.50
4.00
110.
110.
0.38
0.45
=
=
==
==
=
=
=
=
::
Cl
C2
C3
3.40
2.95
2.20
272.
445.
440.
0.92
1.31
0.97
330.
7.4
2.3
4.8
8.0
1.8
4.9
3.0
=
445.
430.
500.
400.
Dl
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
D7
D8
3.30
2.70
2.10
2.70
2.80
5.00
4.40
4.70
300.
365.
410.
370.
360.
250.
210.
220.
0.99
0.98
0.86
1.00
1.01
1.25
0.92
1.03
360.
430.
480.
420.
430.
280.
340.
465.
500.
480.
460..
350.
7.3
7.4
6.0
6.2
5.0
6.2
7.4
7.5
7.0
6.2
4.9
5.0
2.9
3.0
2.4
2.5
2.0
2.5
~=
==
==
==
==
El
E2
E3
3.75
3.35
2.90
250.
370.
380.
0.94
1.24
1.10
295.
400.
430.
395.
285.
400.
8.3
8.6
8.5
8.8
7.1
7.7
3.3
3.4
3.4
Fl
F2
4.00
3.20
230.
325.
0.92
1.04
280.
380.
300.
335.
9.8
8.6
10.6
8.3
3.9
3.4
=
1.9
Table 3.1: Main results of series 1
315
21
Type A which was a quasi hinged

joint, often used in fire-resistant
structures failed of course at a low
stress range by a shear fracture of
the pins. The pins which were
welded by fillet welds can be
improved by using butt welds. The
whole "plasticity" raised of course
in the connection.
Type
showed
a
poorer
behaviour than type to although it
is less hinged. Failure arrived by
fracture of the net cover-plate
section. The plasticity was a pure
beam plastic one.
Type C gave very differing results.
While specimen C1 (the bare steel
solution) gave good results with a
high ductility derived from shear
panel deformation, C2 and C3 (the
concreted specimens) gave very
poor results as the shear panel
plasticity
was obstructed by
concrete.
Specimen E& after testing
Type D (bolted connections) may be divided in rigid and semi-rigid items, which are
characterized by thinner end-plates and the absence of stiffeners. This reduced
end-plate thickness led to plate bending and by that way to bolt bending which is an
undesirable effect. On the other hand, the tendons used in several test instead of
bolts showed a poor behaviour reducing the test to tendon testing. The beam plastic
rotation was dominant.
Type E (welded connection) showed an excellent behaviour in spite of the very thick
fillet welds derived from EUROCODES . Compared to bare steel structures, the
rigidity as well as the bearing capacity of the structure may be increased in a
significant way. The only problem for this type of joint is the missing erection facilities.
The main plastification aroused in the shear panel zone.
Type F was designed according to the strong column/weak beam principle by
weakening the beam at a specific location to force plastification. While losses in
elastic and ultimate strength could be noted, the ductility was quite excellent.
22
3-16
3.4. Improvements deduced for series 2 and 3

Series 1 led to the following preliminary conclusions and guide-lines:
E specially for series C and E , the shear panel deformation is not
neglectable, leading thus to greater P-d effects in the columns.
However it is concluded that this shear panel deformation is admissible
as long as the overall stability of the structure is guarantied. One
exception should nevertheless be mentioned. If during a test on a bare
steel specimen, the global plastic deformation is limited to shear panel
deformation, this solution is to be avoided in composite structures, as
concrete prevents shear panel deformation.
Design of most of the tests of series D was based on the use of high
strength tendons (10.9), which are very difficult to find in practice. For
this reason, in series 2 and 3 only 10.9 bolts were used together with 2
nuts in order to avoid slipping.
In series D, two types of abutting plates, a thin one (26 mm) and a thick
one (44 mm), were used. The thin plate caused bolt bending and bolt
failure. In order to avoid this, in series 2, only abutting plates thicker
then 40 mm were used.
In series 1, all the main welds used were fillet welds. According to
Eurocode 8 "Seismic Design", connection parts are to be designed for
1.2 times the ultimate element resistance, leading thus to rather
important welds with all possible disadvantages. Therefore it was
decided for series 2, to use only butt welds.
3.5 Effect of flange weakening on fire resistance

One of the discussed methods to shift the plastic hinge away from the direct
beam-column connection into the beam region can be realized by a systematic
flange weakening of the profile. This can be done by cutting off a defined part of the
flanges (series F). Because of the moments under earthquake action the weakening
should be done at upper and lower flange.
Figure 3.7 shows such a situation for a composite beam. Cross section design is in
accordance with the design of the test of the research program.
The plastic moment capacity in dependence of the rate of the flange weakening "a"
was calculated. In addition, the influence of such profile weakening on the ultimate
load capacity under ISO-fire conditions was analyzed.
All calculations were done on the following assumptions for the material properties:
3-17
Steel profile (St 37)
by = 240 N/mm 2
Concrete (B 25)
bc =
Reinforcement (BSt 420/500)
by = 420 N/mm 2
25 N/mm 2
23
Figure 3.7
Figure 3.8 shows the time dependence of the ultimate moment capacity under
ISO-fire action.
For t = 0 the ultimate moment capacity M u is given as a function of the weakening of
the upper and lower flange.
Figure 3.9 gives the results of this analysis for defined fire resistance classes of
0/30/60/90 minutes ISO-fire. On the horizontal axis the percentage of weakening of
each flange is given as a total value or as percentage of the flange width.
This figure manifests, that by profile weakening the plastic moment capacity can be
reduced in a way that just for the decreasing values of moment distribution from the
seismic loading the weakest point can be shifted away from the connection into the
beam. There is a linear dependence with a reduction of the plastic moment capacity
of 64% for a total width reduction of 50% for both flanges for the cross section
shown in figure 3.7.
On the other hand, the reduction of cold plastic moment capacity will influence the
fire resistance of such a cross section. But the decrease of fire resistance is as well
nonlinear as of smaller amount than under cold conditions. For 90 minutes ISO-fire
the value of Mu (t=90) is reduced of about 20 % for a/s = 50 % compared with the
original cross section (a = 0).
These numerical investigations indicate that with a local profile modification, the
localisation of plastic hinges can be influenced in a defined way.
Influence on fire resistance of such modified profiles seems to be acceptable, can be
calculated and thus, taken into account within the design process.
24
3-18
Figure 3.8: Time dependence of ultimate moment under fire
3-19
25
Mu[kNm
A
240
200
160
F-0
F-30
F-60
F-90
120
30
10
20
30
40
50
52
75
104
130
_^.
a/b [ % ]
-^>
[ mm ]
Figure 3.9: Capacity losses for different fire resistances
26
3-20
Chapter 4
Test series 2
Series 2 was dealing with interior beamtocolumn joints presenting a beam

connected to each column flange. As in a frame submitted to horizontal forces, the
moment applied at both sides has the same sign, the solicitations in the shear panel
are doubled and become most of the time dominant. Therefore the parameter of
adding doubler plates to the web was added.
4.1. Selection of the test specimen

Six types of joint named G to L were defined for test series 2 based on those of
series 1 and taking into account the conclusions of chapter 3. In total, 20 test were
performed.
Type G (fig. 4.1) is the equivalent of type A in series 1. Two tests G1 and G2 have
been realized. In test G1, the welding of the pins was improved by using a butt weld,
increasing thus the shear area. For test G2, the philosophy of a shear connection
was maintained, but instead of using pins, the fixation was realized directly by the
endplate.
Type H (fig. 4.2) was an exact cross form copy of type (series 1). Only one test
was performed without modification.
G2
r
j
Figure 4.1
41
Figure 4.2
27
Type I (fig. 4.3) was derived from type E of

series 1 (fully welded joint). As in practice
it is difficult and also expensive to realize
completely welded structures with a high
quality insurance, the beam web is first
bolted to a cover-plate in order to facilitate
erection. The shear is also transmitted by
this cover-plate. Afterwards the beam
flanges are welded to the column flanges
by butt welds.
Five tests (table 4.1) were performed,
where the influence of transverse stiffeners
was analyzed as well as that of reinforcing
the web (shear panel) by welding web
plates directly to the web or to the column
flange edges.
Figure 4.3
Table 4.1
Web plates
Stiffeners
Bare steel
11
Composite
without slab
12
Composite with
slab
14
Web plates and

stiffeners
13
15
Type J (fig. 4.4) was a bolted joint (similar

to type D of series 1) including the
following improvements:
bolts 10.9 with two
instead of tendons,
nuts
50 mm thick end plates,

stiffeners located at the end
plate level.
Every joint contained only 4 bolts. The
seven tests realized are shown in table
4.2.
28
Jl
{--
- +
-
-i
LU
Figure 4.4
4-2
Web plates
Stiffeners
are steel
J4
J1
Composite
without slab
J7
J2
Composite with
slab
J5
J3
Web olates and

stiffeners
J6
Type (fig. 4.5) was

similar to type F. In order
to
reduce
workshop
costs the length of the
weakened beam section
was shortened from 500
to 200 mm. Series 1 had
shown that this length
was sufficient to develop
a plastic hinge. The four
tests
performed
are
presented in table 4.3.
Type L (fig. 4.6) was a

completely new type of
joint not yet tested in
Table 4.2
series 1. While all the
other specimen followed
the principle continuous column/interrupted beams, this specimen had continuous
beams in order to facilitate erection. This design is often used under static and fire
Figure 4.5
Figure 4.6
Table 4.3
Web platas
Bare steel
Stifieners
Without web
plates and
stiffeners
Kl
Composite
without slab
Composite with
slab
4-3
K3
K2
K4
29
loads, but seemed at a first view not adapted for seismic loads. Stiffeners are
unavoidable for this type of joint.
4.2 Testing installation

As the test of series 2
were also realized in
Milan, it was tried to
use
the
existing
testing
facilities.
Furthermore a major
problem consisted in
applying
at
both
beams the
same
force
but
with
opposite signs. This
could
have
been
done with complex
measuring devices,
but
the
solution
shown in figure 4.7 is
more accurate and
less expensive.
Figure 4.7
As for series 1, the

column
is
in
a
horizontal position. But
while in series 1 the
column
ends
were
fixed, in series 2, two
pinended
columns
were used. By that
way,
the
whole
horizontal reaction has

to be supported by the
dispCcenervc
lower beam support.
Thus the forces (action
force
&5
and
reaction)
are
always equal in value
and
of opposite signs.
Figure 4.8
No
comparison
measures between the two forces are needed. The measurement devices shown in
figure 4.8 allow to measure the same data as in series 1.
BE
5=3
30
44
4.3. Major results

As for series 1, the detailed results are given in Appendix A. Table 4.4 gives a
summary of the results obtained during the 20 tests. Concerning the wear (often in
fire resistance used) joints G and H, the overall behaviour of type H was better. The
solution G1 (with pins) is not recommended, as it is very difficult to control the quality
of pin welding. With a higher rebar reinforcement in the slab, the results can
nevertheless be increased in a significant way.
'
e;
rad
KNm
rad
KNm
IO 5
IO 5
Gl
7.00
0.00
45.
0.30
G2
3.75
0.00
55.
HI
3.10
0.00
11
2.83
12
My
>
M 2.5%
Mu
6u
Qu
Q
KNm
e.
2.5%
KNm
KNm
0.21
==
==
150.
0.47
170.
90.
4.2
2.9
3.6
1.55
260.
0.75
300.
430.
>10.0
>13.6
>4.0
2.25
1.03
470.
1.06
540.
470.
>10.0
>9.5
>4.0
13
1.50
0.70
490.
0.73
600.
480.
>10.0
>13.0
>4.0
14
1.55
0.75
700.
1.00
750.
650.
6.5
4.2
2.6
15
1.30
0.50
720.
0.95
==
850.
2.1
2.2
0.8
Jl
2.50
0.94
360.
0.90
420.
590.
>10.0
11.1
>4.0
J2
2.00
0.60
500.
1.00
600.
610.
>10.0
>4.0
J3
1.37
0.40
520.
0.71
G0.
570.
>10.0
>10.0
>14.1
J4
2.25
0.25
5S0.
1.31
620.
760.
4.5
3.4
1.8
1.66
0.00
660.
1.10
740.
840.
4.5
4.1
1.8
J6
1.32
0.37
700.
0.92
800.
860.
<4.5
<4.9
<1.8
J7
1.77
1.00
720.
1.10
660.
560.
6.5
5.9
2.6
Kl
3.00
1.25
320.
0.9
460.
525.
>10.0
>10.4
>4.0
K2
1.75
0.78
500.
0.38
620.
560.
>10.0
>11.4
>4.0
K3
1.75
0.00
560.
0.98
660.
830.
9.0
9.2
3.7
K4
2.45
1.00
500.
1.23
530.
530.
>10.0
>8.1
3.2
LI
2.63
1.30
330.
1.02
440.
330.
9.0
8.8
3.6
==
==
>4.0
Table 4.4
45
31
For the welded l-series, it can be stated that high rigidity obtained by web plates and
stiffeners lead to very high resistance characteristics but to a poor ductility behaviour
and brittle fractures. The cyclic behaviour is very regular.
The bolted connections of series J gave similar results than those obtained for series
I. However the danger of brittle fracture was smaller. The fact of locating the
stiffeners at top and bottom of the end plates instead of top and bottom beam flange
was of great benefit as the shear panel zone was increased.
Thicker end plates than for series 1 gave in general better results. As the difference
of the column flange thickness and the plate thickness was significant (19 mm to 50
mm), improvements can probably be obtained by inserting back plates at the bolt
level.
For type K, the section reduction of the beam was not sufficient to obtain plastic
hinges in the beam instead of a shear panel mechanism. The results are
nevertheless as good as those of series J from the point of view of resistance and
ever better from the point of view of ductility. It is specially interesting that specimen
K4 was the only one tested without stiffeners and without web plates (doubler
plates). The results obtained are nevertheless comparable to those of K2 and J3
(both with stiffeners), proving that infilled concrete provides bearing capacities
similar to those of stiffeners.
Test L1 was the only specimen of series L tested. Due to the fact that the shear panel
is reduced by about 30 % (bear section HEA 260 instead of column section HEB
300), the shear panel mechanism became more significant.
Specimen of series 2 after testing
32
4-6
Chapter 5
Test series 3
In series 3, 10 tests were realized on complex frames with concrete slab, which may
be divided as follows:
4 tests on single span onestorey frames in Wuppertal
3 tests on double span onestorey frames in Lige and
3 tests on double span twostorey frames in Darmstadt
Furthermore, as the Darmstadt tests included connections which have not yet been
analyzed in series 1 or 2, for instance the joints of the upper level or the encasing of
the columns at the fixations, Darmstadt performed several simple tests on these
elements (series 4).
The types of connections to be tested in series 3 were selected from those showing
an interesting behaviour in series 1 and 2 and presenting facilities for erection and
concreting in order to reduce test preparation time in the laboratory.
As all the results, testing equipments and measurement devices are described in
extenso appendix to D, this chapter gives only an overview on the different tests.
5.1 The Lige specimen

The two first specimen to be tested in
Lige were based on the H1 connection
type (figure 5.1). The difference between
the two test was that the first one was
tested with four vertical loads of 10 tons
each and the second one without. This
type of joint was selected as it correponds
to an often used joint, which presents a lot
of erection facilities. The aim of the two
tests were to detect the seismic resistance
of standard fireresistant structures as well
as the influence of axial forces on the shear
panel behaviour.
Figure 5.1
51
33
'.0
HE 260 A
>
i6.'_
SI
' J
'.30*300*1,0
The third specimen was connected by

type K2 joints (figure 5.2). In this type,
the beam section is weakened in order
to locate the plastic hinges in the
beams and to avoid plastifications in
the columns and in the shear panel.
This specimen corresponds to a strong
one, which is a new solution in seismic
engineering and which has been
developped by the Lige university .
The ductility shown in the previous
series was very good for this type and it
was
interesting to
analyze the
behaviour of a more complex structure.
Figure 5.2
The specimens corresponded to a

modell cut out from a real structure and
containing three columns with the relating composite floors. As the bottoms of the
specimen columns are located in the middle of the real column, the contraflexural
point, the specimen were hinged at their fixations.
5.2 The Wuppertal specimen

The four frames tested in Wuppertal may be divided in two frames with strong joints
and in two frames with weak moment resisting joints. The specimens corresponded
to the modelling of a composite floor with on the top and on the bottom each time
one half of the column. As in the middle of the column, it is behaving like a hinged
structure, the specimens were foreseen with articulations at each column end.
The
connection
types
corresponding to the weak joints
were the types G1 (figure 5.3) and
H1 from series 2. These two joints
were especially choosen, as they
are corresponding to often used
connection types in fireproof
composite
structures like the
ARBED AFsystem.
The aim of this choice was to
analyze
the
inherent
seismic
resistance of fire resistant designed
structures.
The two strong joints tested are I3
and K2. I3 (figure 5.4) was selected
for being a traditional joint used in
34
HE 260 A
HE 260 A
Ml
Ill
I
01
li
o
S
BO-
Figure 5.3
52
bare steel structures in seismic

regions. K2 was choosen as this type
behaved very well in the series 1 and
2. It gives the possibility to test a
completely
new kind on more
complete structures.
HE 260 A
ao
'
HE 260 A
The four tests were performed with two

vertical dead loads of 10 tons each
applied on the beams.
..>!
. 1
*&.
1-" I
lI
3
B O
00
o
m
LU
3Z
Figure 5.4
5.3 The Darmstadt specimen

In order to reduce the horizontal displacements, the joints used in Darmstadt had to
be strong bending resisting joints. For feasability reasons, no vertical loads were
applied. Results from Lige and Wuppertal gave enough information concerning the
influence of axial forces. The test specimens were bolted by endplates to a bottom
bearing construction.
Finally type 15 and J6 (figures 5.5 and 5.6) were selected. Both types contained
stiffeners. The reinforcement of the
shear panel zone by web plates was
left out, as it is dangerous to stiffen to
much the joint (bolts punched out of
the column flange in test J4 in series
HE 260 A
I g>t
2).
HE 260A
J-(
.
j
5=
CD
Figure 5.5
5-3
The third frame tested in Darmstadt,

was somewhat apart of the original
context of the present research
project. In fact the idea was to analyze
a composite structure with standard
connections (type H1), where the
horizontal stiffness is given by an
excentric K-bracing. This can lead to
very economic structures, as on the
one hand no major modifications have
to been made and on the other hand
the plastification zones will in that case
35
It?,
.50
F5--
HE 260 A -
!>(.
n. '
be located in the beams (shear

hinges). Furthermore the design of
these shear hinges will become very
economic, due to the fact that the
stiffening is guaranteed by an
adequate design of the stirrups in the
beams instead of expensive stiffeners.
This kind of structure will be analyzed
more in detail in an other project. The
present test served as orientation test.
is-
^
Figure 5.6
5.4 Design of the testing Installation for series 3

5.4.1 The Lige installation
The Lige testing installation is shown in figure 5.7. The structure consisted in a
bottom bearing construction (a) made from HEB 500 beams and fixed to the soil (b).
The specimen are fixed to this beam by hinges (c), in order to simulate the
contraflexural point in the columns. On the top of the columns, these are fixed by the
same way to a connection beam (d) which is introducing the loads equally in the
Figure 5.7
36
5-4
three columns (e). Between this connection beam and the composite beam with slab
(f) will be installed the vertical hydraulic jacks simulating the dead loads on several
specimen. The axial forces in the columns created as reactions of the jack action can
be neglected. On the right side of the installation is located the counterframe (g) for
guiding the horizontal forces to the bottom structure. Two serial connected jacks
(max. 1000 kN) are linking the counterframe to the connection beam. The fixations
are realized by two hinges. The maximum displacement is about 80 cm (40 cm in
both direction). The vertical stability of the jacks is assumed by two counterweights
of 600 kg each. The outofplane stability is guaranteed by one frame structure for
the jacks and by four larger frames for the test specimen. These frames are used as
guiding structures for the slab and for the beam.
5.4.2 The Wuppertal installation
As the test specimen of Wuppertal are similar to those of Lige, the testing
installations are of course also similar (figure 5.8).
The specimen are fixed by the same hinges to the bottom bearing construction (HEB
500). The joint with the load introduction beam is slightly modified in order to save
height and to use by that way an existing frame from Wuppertal as counterframe.
w [mm]
F [kN]
ra
r\'"'f\
J
jtce
111.
DETAIL
,,^,/^^
o
r>
II
I
COflPlSITC
CLUHM
iy
'
Figure 5.8
The load introduction beam is connected to this loading frame by the jack (300 kN)
which is not hinged at his fixations. The slab is continously secured against
outofplane instability by two channels.
5.4.3 The Darmstadt installation
55
37
Figure 5.9
The Darmstadt installation was the most important one. It is divided in two parts, the
testing area and the erection area (figure 5.9). In order to save time, the beams and
columns are concreted in an horizontal position on the ground and then erected
KXtpjoo.
SCHNITT AA
Figure 5.10
38
56
close together in the erection area. Afterwards the slabs of the three specimen are
concreted at the same time. After the concrete has hardened, one specimen after
the other is transported on rails to the testing area. The testing installation properly
said, consists of a mighty bottom bearing construction made of beams with flange
thicknesses of about 70 mm. The counterframe is made from two parallel trusses
which are connected by vertical and horizontal bracings (figure 5.10) as well as by
two HEB 1000 beams which are used for the fixation of the jacks on every floor. The
upper jack has a total displacement capacity of 65 cm. The load of the upper jack
was twice that of the lower one. As the specimen were connected in a rigid way to
the bottom structure, this displacement was large enough to reach almost the failure
of the specimen. The load introduction jack-frame is realized on each level by a fork
which is fixed by two articulations to the upper flange of the beams in the span close
to the counterframe.
5.5 Definition of the measurements in series 3

The choice of the measurements is a function of the purpose of the tests. The tests
in series 3 were realized for the following two reasons:
to see whether the behaviour observed on single connections of
various kinds (exterior columns and interior columns) can be just
superposed or if some mutual influence of elements interferes.
Figure 5.11
5-7
39
to check the results obtained with single connections and improve the
statistical basis for connections of high interest for composite
construction.
As the specimen were rather large, especially the Darmstadt tests, which contained
each 6 joints beam to column and 3 fixations of the columns, the effort for realizing
measurements is growing up quickly.
5.5.1 Measurements of displacements
Reason two requires for each connection an instrumentation similar to that of series
1 and 2.
Reason one could be met by simple measurements of the overall behaviour and the
hypothesis that the steel and concrete are exactly similar to those of series 1 and 2,
which is probably not the case, especially for concrete.
In order to get a maximum of data both measurements will be realized.
Displacements measurements for the Lige and the Wuppertal tests are presented
on figure 5.11. Those for the Darmstadt tests are similar.
Shear rotation in every column and plastic rotation of every beam can be derived by
means of relations similar to those used in series 1 and 2.
5.5.2 Measurements of
loads and internal
forces
Load F applied to the
tested frame can be
measured by a load cell
or a pressiometer after
proper calibration of the
hydraulic jack system.
Internal forces had to be
measured also, otherwise
no
realistic
moment-rotation
curve
can be drawn and no
true comparison with test
results of series 1 and 2
can be made.
Figure 5.12
In the test setup used in Lige and in Wuppertal, the bending moments in each
column above and below the tested zone, that means 10 cm above the slab and 10
cm under the lower flange of the beam, were measured as internal forces (figure
5.12).
40
5-8
This was done by strain gage measurements on the outer faces of the flanges of the
column and assumed geometrical properties of the column section.
From these measurements we can derive:
the shear in the columns and a check of total shear ( or calibration of
the real column section properties)
the bending moment in the beam corresponding to an exterior column
the sum of the bending moments of the two beams crossing an interior
column; this parameter is the same as the one established in tests on
interior column connections in Milan.
Figure 5.13
The measurement of internal forces by strain-gages realized in the Darmstadt test

setup was similar to that applied in Lige and Wuppertal (figure 5.13).
5-9
41
Chapter 6
The development of a program for time history
simulations of steel and composite structures under
earthquake actions.
6.1 Introduction
In the first phase of the SRCS-project the research group decided to accompany the
experimental research by additional numerical simulation studies.
The aim of these studies was, to investigate the response of complete composite
structures loaded by earthquake-actions in using the experimental results of tests
with beam to column connections. For this reason the particular behaviour of the
connection parts that were tested, had to be modelled such, that the test results
could be simulated realistically and the behaviour of similar connection types not
tested, could be extrapolated from the tests. This procedure would give an insight
into the main parameters controlling the dynamic behaviour of connections and
reduce the number of required tests.
The availability of an appropriate simulation program was also considered to be
necessary for the development of simplified engineering models for composite
structures in Eurocode 8. By the simulation program a number of parameter studies
could be realized, that could lead to practical design rules.
To find an appropriate program, a benchmark test was carried out with several
programs. After studying the results and the arguments, the program PLANT was
selected.
One of the reasons for this decision was the presence of the source code, which
allows to implement additional features and to adapt this program to the particular
requirements of composite structures.
PLANT is program for static and dynamic time history calculations of three
dimensional steel structures. It has been developed by the Institute of Steel
Construction of RWTH Aachen. It takes account of the geometrical and material
related nonlinearities.
In the following the particular additional requirements for the further development of
PLANT, that were formulated in the beginning of the project are given (chapter 6.2).
6-1
43
The result of the development is the program DYNACS, that

requirements are explained in chapter 6.3.
meets these
In chapter 6.4 some examples for the application of DYNACS are presented.
6.2 Additional requirements

(to a simulation program for time history calculations of steel- and composite
structures under earthquake actions)
6.2.1 Nonlinear material behaviour
The program should consider the nonlinear behaviour of the materials, which are
parts of composite beams, i.e. steel, concrete and reinforcement and of the shear
joints between the concrete and steel parts.
6.2.2 Geometrical nonlinearities
To analyze slender structures, the program should be able to take into account
geometrical effects due to second order theory.
6.2.3 Shear forces
The program has to consider the shear forces and deformations in the panels at the
beam to column connections and' other steel parts and the shear forces and
deformations in the shear joints.
6.2.4 Load history and strength degradation
Because of the cyclic loading and nonlinear material behaviour, the load history has
to be taken into consideration. The redistribution of the inner forces in a structure
according to partial damage due to low cycle fatigue, has an important influence on
the behaviour of the structure. This strength degradation has to be taken into
account while describing the load history.
6.2.5 Short calculation time
In order to reduce the time needed for the time step analysis of dynamically loaded
structures, considering geometrical and material dependant nonlinearities, the
program has to be optimized in view of calculation speed.
6.2.6Additional requirements
Additional technical and comfort requirements concerning the handling of the
program have to be considered.
44
6-2
6.3 Implementation of the required features

On the basis of the program PLANT, a new program, called DYNACS, has been
developed. This program has the features described in the following.
6.3.1 Nonlinear material behaviour
Additionally to the bilinear stress-strain relationship for steel, which was already
implemented in PLANT, the following rules describing the behaviour of composite
members have been adopted.
Concrete
The compressive behaviour of concrete is described by using the
parabolic stress-strain relationship:
with:
Eo
initial elasticity modulus

total strain
co
strain at peak stress f c
additionally:
eu
ultimate strain at crushing point
Figure 6.1: Stress - strain - relationship

of concrete
The tensile strength of the concrete between the cracks is taken into account by the
tension stiffening behaviour.
6-3
45
Reinforcement
In the compressive area of the concrete section, the reinforcement
bars are taken into account in addition to the concrete parts. In the
area in tension, the tension stiffness of the concrete between the
cracks is approximated by using a fictious enhanced area of the
reinforcing bars.
As,i =
1
with:
As
0 4 tc,i
-
As
real area of the reinforcement cross section
As.i
fictious area of the reinforcing bars
percentage of reinforcement
fc.
tensile strength of concrete
fs
yield stress of reinforcing steel
,
E p l ^
fs
/fe(
is
Figure 6.2: Stress - strain relationship of Figure 6.3: Stress - strain relationship of steel
reinforcement
46
64
Structural steel
The behaviour of structural steel under cyclic loading is given by a
bilinear a - hysteresis defined by the following parameters:
Eel
modulus of elasticity
Epl
modulus of plasticity
yield stress
This assumed behaviour of the material

considers the hardening rule and the
Bauschinger - effect if the direction of the load
has changed.
6.3.2 Geometrical nonlinearities
The consideration of second order-effects was
already implemented in PLANT, therefore no
further development was necessary.
Figure 6.4
6.3.3 Modelling of the particular behaviour of the beam to column connections

and the shear panel
The modelling of complex beam to column connections can be realized with
simplified substitute models, which use members with predefined force-deformation
relationships (Fig. 6.4), which can be taken directly from the test (Fig. 6.5) or
extrapolated from the tests, if structures similar to the test specimens shall be
analyzed.
- curve from test
calculated - curve
<P
Figure 6.5
6-5
47
The diagonal spring (a) describes the particular behaviour of the shear panel
whereas the other springs (b) define the behaviour of the connections and the plastic
moment - rotation - relationship of the beam.
6.3.4 Load history and strength degradation
In order to verify the experimental results and to check the accuracy of the chosen
simulation models, the possibility of a deformation controlled calculation method for
the time history has been adopted. The calculation follows step by step the same
rules, as the cyclic tests on the specimens were carried out. Additionally a dynamic
time step calculation using any acceleration or time dependant forces can be carried
out.
The depth of the plastification during a numerical simulation indicates the degree of
the strength degradation for the next cycle. The strength degradation has been
taken into account by the hysteresis evolution method. By varying different internal
parameters in the degradation function it is possible to approach the behaviour of
tested joints very accurately.
The modification of a system concerning its behaviour in the ultimate limit state is
determined by the comparison of the energy under cyclic loading with its virgin state.
The energy of the system in a fixed timestep a is defined as Pa, and in the original
state as Pao.
Hence, the degradation can be written as:
S - 1-
Pa
The degradation S depends on the load history, the material properties and the
structure.
The values of the energy Pa and Pao are obtained under the condition, that the
structure has reached its ultimate limit state (i.e. 6P=0). Then:
Pa = 2 " wa Fa
PaO = 2 ' w0 ' Fa0
where F are the forces and w are the dependant deformations.
An other way to describe the upper relationships is given by:
Pa = ^- ka Wa
PaO = ko
with:
48
6-6
Ka
_ Fa
. .
- Wa
_ Fa o
K0
~~w
The equation (6.1) can be written now:
The following general equation for the degradation of a system during a time history
is derivated in the doctoral thesis of Dr. Dorka:
Fan (w.) = Fa0 (wa)
1 e ("aWan'
1 F.
) *
nl
_A_
an1
where
the
"effect
function" e
describes
the
modificationskeletoncurve in the deformation area w.
Kn)
distribution
of
the
Figure 6.6: Example of an

energy condition
Model for describing the degradation of nonlinear systems
Dr. Dorka describes several possibilities of evolution models, for instance

exponential, consistent, linear or uniform evolution.
In DYNACS the exponential model is used at present. The decrease of F in this
model is:
Fa. (W) = F0 (,) b
6-7
b (VU) = " (%")

r
a n - l ( w anj
49
with:
Fo(wan)
=known force of the original system at the deformation state

wan
=function depending on the load history
Two proposals are made for the function b:
1.0
bj=B(waj/ws)
^^
\B
1.0 wa; /w s
Figure 6.7.a: Gradual degradation
1.0
0.5
B\
/ ^
wj/w s
1.0
b -
1 + (w a j/w[) B
waj/ws
Figure 6.7.b: Sudden degradation
50
6-8
6.3.5 Short calculation time

A reduced calculation time has been achieved by the following developments:
The solution and distribution of the equation system is done by using
the skyline-method.
A 'Dynamic' management of the required memory is chosen, only the
initial global space must be declared in the main-routine.
The dimensions of the used arrays are calculated from the actual
investigated system.
The Input/Output time has been reduced by taking the stiffness matrix
and most of the arrays into the memory.
6.3.6 Additional features
Raleigh-damping
DYNACS assumes the damping matrix C as a linear combination of the
stiffness matrix and the mass matrix M:
C = aM +
In order to save time, it is possible, to define mass distributions along
the members in the structure. These distributed masses of the
members are added to the lumped masses at both nodes of the
beams.
The lumped masses are not defined only in the three translation
degrees of freedom but also in the rotation degrees of freedom.
It is possible to define the acceleration in any direction.
The weight of a structure can be taken into account by defining a
gravity vector.
The output of the results can be more easily interpreted by giving the
possibility of varying the form and the volume of the output.
6.4 Examples of calculation

The following examples illustrate the applicability of the program.
6.4.1 Simulation of the test results of beam to column connections.
This examples show comparisons between the experimental and numerical results of
cruciform-joints tested in Milano (Fig. 6.8.a - c).
6-9
51
rTT/ m a
LULLUS
I?
09
06
03
00
.03
06
Tat. p i . Rot
09
Iradl
J o
O
ll
I l i .
c ?
to
II
.10
Test results
0)
o*
77
o;
oa
Shear pan. not . (radi
Results of simulation
Figure 6.8a: Simulation of test J3
"
3
c
.12
.06
Of
.0J
Tot. p i . Rot.
.12
(rad)
I
t
c
*
c 7
m
12
.09
OJ
.00
OJ
06
09
12
Snear pan. Rot.(rad)
Test results
Figure 6.8b: Simulation of test J4
52
610
=' 1
g
.12
- 09
Tot. p i . nat.
f 3
' Lil '
11
Shear pan
Test results
(radi
rvjt.lrad]
Figure 6.8c: Simulation of test J6
6.4.2 Cyclic behaviour of a frame

A simulation of the behaviour of a frame tested in Wuppertal was carried out. The
numerical results of an extrapolation of the test results are shown in Fig. 6.9.
6.4.3 F rame under earthquake action.

The dynamic behaviour of a five storey frame was simulated under the load of
El-Centro earthquake. The relationship of the beam-to-column connections were
taken from experimental results. Some results of the calculation are shown in Fig.
6.10.
6-11
53
//////////J//JJ
}////J///>////////Jl/l/Jl
Jfr
7&>
Tested frame
f/7/
" f
yff /'
//
xw
zoo
li/
tOO
200
300
displacement [mm)
Test results
50
350
M0
150
50
50
150
250
350
displacement
[mm]
Extrapolation of test results
Figure 6.9:Simulation of the cyclic behaviour of a BUW frame
54
612
NODE 2 '
to
up
..0
''NODE 1
4.0
4.0
-+5.0
5.0
5.0
1;
columns : HE 300
beams
: HE 260 A
connection type E1
.Ml
I.Mt
I.NI
.
.
.)
Nod!: P I . n o t . Irstf)
Figure 6.10: Simulation of the behaviour of a frame
613
55
Chapter 7
Recommendations for the amendment and
completion of Eurocode 8
The results obtained during the realization of the 50 tests and their reelaboration
allow to deduct the following principles that should be observed in design and that
should therefore be anchored in Eurocode 8 "Structures in seismic regions":
The contribution of the shear panel to the overall energy dissipation
should not be neglected and is a wanted feature of steel and
composite structures. It should occur together with energy dissipation
in plastic hinges in beams.
A premature damage of the shear panel could be prevented if the
plastic hinges in the beams and the connections (Figure 7.1) form
before the shear panel is strained excessively.
5
K1 2
r1 r 2
/"7/f////
/ in
r3
Win .
f II11 II /// IJ'y
i . . .
Vawttf hMl tatatl* k*l
%* lH(k *ami* IrMl
'r' r2
!
i:
'
V
/ /
i:
/ / / /
^ ^
!
Titti Aitttln |r*l
Figure 7.1
71
57
Therefore the shear panel should be capacity designed in view of the

beam to column connections (beam or connections), taking account
of a realistic ultimate strength of the shear panel.
The strength of the shear panel should be estimated considering the
cooperation of the shear panel with the frame formed by the flanges
and stiffeners.
In case of composite shear panels the strength of the panel could be
estimated by adding the strength of the reinforced concrete parts
against shear deformations to the strength of the steel panel.
After cracks occur in the concrete parts, the concrete infillment
continues to cooperate and prevents the steel parts from local
buckling. E ven in the stage when the concrete crushes, this
cooperation continues. The crushing strength of the concrete can be
enhanced by the reinforcement bars.
The connections should be designed such, that sufficient rotation is
possible without loss of strength. To this end, the following design rules
should be applied:
In endplate connections, the tension bolts should be capacity
designed in view of the plastic design of the endplate. Any
welds between endplates and beams should be capacity
designed.
For shear connections, the shear resistance of bolts should be
capacity designed to the bearing resistance in order to prevent
shear rupture of the bolts before plastic deformation in the
holes. All other welded connections should also be capacity
designed.
Yielding of the steel girders in the tension zones of composite beams
and yielding of the reinforcement in the concrete slab under negative
moments should occur without premature crushing of the concrete
slab and premature local buckling of the steel parts in compression. To
this end load concentration in the transfer of compression loads from
the beam to the column should be prevented unless local crushing is
tolerated.
The design of the flexibility of the shear joint of composite beams
should be such, that crushing of the concrete slab before yielding of
the shear studs and of the steel beam is prevented.
58
7-2
Chapter 8
Recommendations to improve ECCS document 45
"Testing procedure for assessing the behaviour of
structural steel elements under cyclic loads"
8.1. Introduction
In the context of the present research, about 50 cyclic tests on connections and
structures have been performed during the last four years in four european
laboratories (Milano, Darmstadt, Wuppertal, Lige).
That experience leads to make some remarks on the existing ECCS testing
procedure for assessing the behaviour of structural steel elements under cyclic
loads.
The remarks mainly bear on the link which can be wished between the tests and
some significant values in a practical design context for structures.
One of these values is the global permanent horizontal displacement of the structure,
which should not be allowed to be greater than 2.5 % if the structure is to be kept
alive after the earthquake. Thus experimental values far greater than that one are of a
reduced practical interest.
Another value is related to the structural behaviour factor q which will be claimed for
the structure including the structural component submitted to test. Again rotations far
higher than the one corresponding to q times the maximum elastic displacement are
of little practical interest.
Another remark bears on the parameters of interpretation of the test. The cumulated
absorbed energy has been established in recent research works as being a very
significant parameter and it should than be introduced. On the other hand, the
rigidity ratios, at least in the way they are computed, are highly sensitive to local
changes in the shape of the load-displacement curve at its intersection with the
displacement axis (zero divided by zero); as these changes do not have a great
meaning, the rigidity ratio is of little interest and could be deleted in its present form
or should be defined in another way.
These facts bring us to suggest to introduce several modifications to the ECCS
testing procedure.
8-1
59
8.2. PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS IN ECCS TECHNICAL NOTE 45

Postulate 1
The paragraph 3.2. (page 6)
3.2. Second test.
The second test also is a classical monotonic displacement increase test,
but it is performed on the compression (negative) range. The procedure is
the same as in the first test. F~
and e y
are deduced.
should be completed at the end of the paragraph

"If the difference between Fy and Fy and/or e and ey is small, an average
value of these quantities may be considered in the subsequent steps'.
Postulate 2
3.3. Third test.
The third test is a cyclic test with increase of displacement, which has
the following characteristics :
- one cycle in the e /4, e /4 interval;
- one cycle in the 2e /4, 2e /4 interval;
y
Y
- one cycle in the 3 e /4, 3 e /4 interval;
- one cycle in the e , e interval;
- three cycles in the 2 e , 2 e interval;
- three cycles in the (2 + 2 n) e + , (2 + 2 n) e
interval (n = 1.2,...).
More cvcles or more intervals may be used if necessary.
should be completed at the end of the paragraph

'This is particularly the case when the element submitted to test is used in the
context of known drift limits or structural behaviour factor q.
Two suggestions on the cyclic proc edure in these two circumstancies are given
at paragraph 8."
60
8-2
Postulate 3
3.4. Parameters of interpretation for one cycle.
The absolute values of the following quantities .are deduced from the
F- e diagram after each cycle - Figure 2 - in the range of e > ey.
+
i
- t h e extremes of d i s p l a c e m e n t e. and e ;
i
- the values of the forces F. and F
corresponding to the extremes of
displacement e. and e.;

i
- the extremes of displacements in the positive and negative range of

the applied forces, e.
and ;
- the tangent modulus corresponding to the change of the sign of the

applied load, tg a. and tg ;
- the areas A. and A. of the positive and negative half cycles. Figure 3.
"F
Figure 3
Figure 2
The following quantities, considered as characterizing parameters are

then computed :
Partial Ductility :
+
y
Full Ductility
8-3
= e
+
+
/ e
i
y
i
Ae. / e
i
y
Ae / e
i
y
61
Full Ductility r a t i o s :
+
.
+ ,
+
e. / (e. + (e. e ))
i
i
y
7
i
eT / (eT + (e + e + ) )
i
i
y
F.i / F y
Resistance r a t i o s :
,!
" = F? / F*"
i
Ritridity
ratios :
s.
i.
.+
.
!
= t g .+
/, t g3 +y
i
= t g ; / tg c
+
Absorbed Energy_ratios : . - - " ~T'

-"
F .(e. - e
+ e. - e )
y
i
y
i
y
AT
1
F~
y
__
_;
(eT - e" + e + - e + )
should be completed at the end of the paragraph by the parameter "Cumulated

energy ratio"
i=l
ij2
il
i1
Postulate 4
In paragraph 3.6. on page 8:
3.6. Parameters of interpretation for the whole test.
The partial ductility
being taken as the variable, the test is
characterized by the following functions/ which are continuous functions

defined on the basis of a limited number of values established in 3 5 .
- Full ductility function
( ) .
o
- Relative resistance function (y ).
- Relative rigidity function ( ) .
- Relative absorbed energy function

- Resistance drop function
n ( ) .
o
( ) .
The number of cycles up to the end of test must also be given.
62
8-4
the list of functions should be completed:

"- Cumulated energy function htot ( rrrj) "
Postulate 5
A completely new paragraph 8 should be inserted at the end of the document:
" 8. Commentary on possible definition of other displacement patterns'
Some special significant values of the displacement, related to the practical use
of the tested element, may sometimes exist. We call them eref.
One of them corresponds to a horizontal drift of the structure equal to 2.5 %,
which is a practical limit over which the structure should rather be demolished
than kept alive.
Another reference value is related to the behaviour factor q Intended for the
structure using elements of the kind which Is tested : q e y Is of the order of
magnitude of the displacements which could be undergone by the disslpative
zones of the structure.
In such cases where eref is defined, the following displacement pattern Is
suggested:
1) 3 steps (loops) of equal displacement at the levels :
6y+K
-*-
w'rth k =1,2,
3, 4, 5, 6 successively
2) then optionally a) or b) defined as follows

a)
3 steps at the levels :

e y + 1,5 (eref-ey) +2 e y
with = 1,2, ....
b)
cycles until failure at the level :

e y + 1,5 (eref - ey)
The end of the test according to option a) puts a greater interest on the
maximum ductility, while an end of test according to option b) is more oriented
towards low cycle fatigue behaviour at displacements which are close to those
expected in a severe earthquake.
8-5
63
Chapter 9
Economic interest of using composite structures in
earthquake prone zones
In general, it is not sufficient to promote a product which is technically matured, but

the product must also be economically interesting. Out of this reflection, two studies
were realized, trying to compare composite steel/concrete solutions to reinforced
concrete (R/C) solutions. It would of course lead to far to present in a scientific report
detailed economic data, but the main results should nevertheless be announced.
For both projects, the following input data were identical:
required fire resistance class F90
building located in a high seismicity zone (for instance Greece)
frames submitted to in-plane solicitations
reinforced concrete frames concreted in-situ
composite frames constituted by prefabricated AF sections
Figure 9.1
9-1
65
design according to Eurocode 8

same design raster for both solutions.
Project 1 dealt with the following characteristics (fig. 9.1):
shopping centre with service loads 5 kN/m2
4 storeys (including ground floor) with a height of 3.5 m each
3 spans of 9.0 m
distance between frames of 6.0 m.
Project 2 showed some differences with the proceeding one (fig. 9.2):
office building with service loads 4 kN/m2
7 storeys with a height of 3.0 m each
3 spans of 6.0 m
distance between frames of 5.0 m.
:=
E
E
m
CO
X
44
++
++
:i
in
-I
++
++
++
++
44
++
44
3x6m
}i
mm
Figure 9.2
66
9-2
Figure 9.3
Both composite and R/C solution were designed for high ductility (class H). This
means that for composite a q-factor of 6 and for R/C a q-factor of 5 is assumed. The
price for this high ductility in reinforced concrete structures is paid by compliance to
strong rules for the reinforcement or to bigger sections.
For project 1, a price comparison was made, where the unit-prices were based upon
practice in Germany. This may not reflect the situation in other countries, especially
southern European ones. For this reason, mass lists of the projects are given in
appendix E, allowing interested people to do their own comparisons.
For the above mentioned German prices, the two solutions were absolutely equal in
price. This comparison does of cause not take into account the multiple advantages
of composite structures like reduced repair costs in case of an earthquake. In fact
pseudodynamic tests realized in Darmstadt [12] showed that composite structures
need nearly no repair for relative strong earthquakes like the one assumed in this
comparison. Figure 9.3 shows a test specimen after the pseudodynamic test.
For project 2, a more quantitative type of comparison was done. Most of these
comparisons give only tendencies and not accurate results, depending on the
choices made at the beginning. For example the R/C structure was designed by
considering the highest structural q-factor for R/C structures which is equal to five.
Having considered lower q-factors would have given an advantage to composite
structures. Another example may be the number of storeys: a greater number of
storeys gives an advantage to composite structures, a smaller one to R/C structures.
9-3
67
Table 9.1 gives some quantitative comparisons:

Composite
R/C
Ratio
Total column surface (m2)
1.88
4.82
0.39
Column surface versus buiding surface (%)
0.3
0.8
0.39
Free space under beams ( 3m storey height ) (m)
2.65
2.44
1.086
Volume of concrete in the beams (m3)
33.3
95.3
0.35
Volume of concrete in the columns (m3)
29.1
93.7
0.31
Resultant base shear per frame (kN)
180
341
0.53
Period of first mode (s)
1.6
0.93
1.72
Top displacement under maximal earthquake (mm)
388
185
2.09
Max. beam bending moment under earthquake conditions

(kNm)
152
226
0.67
Parameter
As the system dimensions were the same for both solution, an advantage not
considered in this study is that storey height can be reduced about 8 to 10% for
composite structures, due to the smaller beam height. This leads in general to lower
buildings, bringing a further reduction in' masses and resulting base shear,
moments,...
68
9-4
Chapter 10
Conclusions
10.1 General remarks

The aim of the present work was to show that composite steel/concrete structures
provide seismic resistance characteristics which can help promote composite
structures in earthquake prone zones of the globe with traditional concrete and
masonry building industries.
As quasi no informations were available concerning the behaviour of composite
structures, it is quite normal that not all problems in relationship with seismic action
could be solved. In order to fill the biggest gaps existing in knowledge and in
standards, it was first of all aimed at obtaining qualitative statements, before
proceeding to a higher number of more detailed parameter studies and tests. This
step should be reserved for a future research project based on the results obtained
herein. For the same reason, the developments made inside the DYNACS software,
had the target to allow the simulation of the tests which were realized. Predicting the
behaviour of completely different structures still remains very unsafe, as the variation
of different parameters were not checked sufficiently in order to obtain an accurate
and universal numerical model.
These models should be developed during a new research project, which will lead to
the development of an aseismic building system and of a user friendly computer
program adapted to the solutions proposed by this building system.
Nevertheless, it was possible to deduce a certain number of conclusions from the
present project. These conclusions may be classified in three groups:
conclusions in relationship with standards and recommendations
conclusions in relationship with design problems
conclusions in relationship with manufacturing and quality insurance
problems.
It schould be noted that 38 different connection types, which were either rigid or
semi - rigid, have been tested at the "Politecnico di Milano". The corresponding
features are given on pages 3-2 to 3-7 and 4-1 to 4-3 in the main report; more
detailed test results are given in Appendix A.
The best connection types, selected out of these tests, have been used for the frame
10-1
69
tests at the "Bergische Universitt Wuppertal" (appendix C), at the University of

Lige (appendix B) and at the 'Technische Hochschule Darmstadt" (appendix D).
10. 2 Standards and recommendations
During the tests, the application of ECCSrecommendations [7] leaded to two
problems:
the displacement step increment was too large and consequently
several specimens failed at an early stage, leading to a poor ductility,
several specimens could not be destroyed as the maximum
displacement of the testing installation was reached and the testing
procedures did not provide regulations for this situation.
Furthermore it makes generally no sense to have excessive plastic displacements in
a structure ( or deformations in an element ), if the overall stability of the building
cannot be assured or if the building cannot be used any longer after the earthquake.
Therefore, the ECCS testing procedures should be completed according to chapter
8 of this report. The user should be given the possibility to claim for ductility or for
serviceability.
On the other hand, a new parameter called "cumulated absorbed energy ratio"
should be introduced. This parameter, which represents the sum of the really
absorbed energy against the sum of the ideally absorbed yield strength energy,
becomes even more important, when the testing procedure aiming at low cycle
fatigue (during a shakedown test) is adopted.
Relating to the amendments of Eurocode 8 [9] and even Eurocode 3 [8], it can be
stated that:
the participation of the shear panel to the overall energy dissipation
should be allowed by taking into account also the shear resistance of
the concrete, as well as the cooperation of the panel with the frame
formed by the flanges and the stiffeners
a pure shear panel plastification should be prohibited and the shear
panel mechanism should in general occur after plastifications in the
beams or in the connections
shear panel, connections and shear studs should be capacity designed
the request of Eurocode 8 for designing the connections for 1.2 times
the bearing capacity of the connected element, leads to excessive fillet
welds which are not compatible with the state of art in welding. This
problem does not exist with butt welds. That's why fillet welds should
be forbidden in seismic design, or it should be required that the
strength of the welding material is at least 20% higher than that of the
ground material in order to fulfil the principle Mu.connection > 1.2
Mu.element
70
102
10.3 Design problems

The present project allowed to define in a qualitative way which kind of detail may be
used or should not be used in design. Among the most important findings may be
noted:
Bolted connections should be realized with high strength bolts and the
use of two nuts per bolt is recommended. Tendons should not be used
as on the one hand most of the time they do not exist in high strength
quality and on the other hand their elongation becomes to great,
leading to high ductility but unrealistic and unadmittable deformations.
The end plates in bolted connections should have a minimal thickness
of at least 40 mm. Thinner end plates lead to excessive plate bending
and by that way to bolt bending, which is badly supported by HS bolts.
A further advantage of using thick plates may be the reduced number
of bolts which can be limited to four. If the difference in thickness
between the end plate and the connected flange becomes too
important, the introduction of back plates may become interesting or
even necessary in order to prevent local failure of the flange.
In bolted connections, the transverse stiffeners in the column should be
located at the upper and lower end plate edges. Thus the shear panel
is increased in height leading to lower solicitations. Simultaneously, this
is the location of the load introduction point.
During the design step, the yield strength of the used steel sections
must be known approximately (+/- 15%). E specially for lower yield
grades this is very difficult, as standards give a maximum and a
minimum for the ultimate strength, but only a minimum for the yield
strength. That's why for a grade FeE 235 with a nominal yield strength
of 235 MPa, effective yield strengths of 290 MPa and even more are
absolutely normal. In these cases, the posterior weakening of the beam
sections similar to test series F and can be of a great help, as a new
design is not necessary.
10.4 Manufacturing and quality insurance problems

For welded structures submitted to cyclic loads it is most important to assure a good
quality control. In fact, the specimens used during this project were manufactured in
three different workshops with a different know-how in welding. Additional welding
was also done at the Universities of Milan, Wuppertal and Darmstadt by the
laboratories themselves or by exterior contractors. The results obtained were in
direct relationship with the workshop qualification.
The workshop which realized the Wuppertal specimens was the less qualified one,
but still corresponding to a good steel fabricator of a country under development.
The results were disappointing. Nearly all the specimen collapsed early due to weld
failure.
10-3
71
Therefore it s very important to charge a highly qualified workshop with the welding
applications and to use whenever it is possible butt welds with a full penetration.
Slag inclusions should be limited to those admitted for parts susceptible to fatigue. A
visual control of all the welds must always be done and at least a few of the welds
should be submitted to ultrasonic or equivalent testing. In case of doubt all the welds
must be inspected this way.
Especially when using joint type K, care should be given to the treatment of the
flame-cutted surfaces at the beam weakening section. A grinding of this surfaces
should always be done in order to eliminate all notches which can lead to low cycle
fatigue failure.
72
10-4
Bibliography
[I]
KANAMORI H. "Quantification of Earthquakes", Nature, Volume 271,

1978
[2]
WAKABAYASHI M. "Design of Earthquake Resistant Buildings", Mc

GrawHill, 1986
[3]
BALLIO G. et al "Sul comportamento di sezioni miste in acciaio e

calcestrezzo sottoposte a carichi ciclici: indagine sperimentale e
modellazione numerica", Giornate A.I.C.A.P. 1987
[4]
JUNGBLUTH
O.
FEYEREISEN
K,
OBEREGGE
O.
"Verbundprofilkonstruktionen mit erhhten Feuerwiderstandsdauer",
Bauingenieur 55,1980
[5]
SCHLEICH J.B., HUTMACHER H., LAHODA E., LICKES J.P. " A new
technology in fireproof steel construction" ,AcierStahlSteel N3,1983
[6]
ARBED Recherches (L) / Universit de Lige, Service Ponts et

Charpentes (), "REFAO/CAFIR, Computer Assisted analysis of the Fire
Resistance of steel and composite steelconcrete structures" C.E.C.
Research 7210SA/502 19821985 Final Report, March 1986
[7]
TC 13, "Recommended Testing Procedure for Assessing the Behaviour

of Structural Steel Elements under Cyclic Loads", ECCS, 1986
[8]
C.E.C., "EUROCODE
Structures", 1989
[9]
C.E.C., "EUROCODE N 8; Structures in Seismic Regions/Design",
3;
Common
Unified
Rules for
Steel
1989
[10]
ARBED, "AF 30/90 Verbundtrger; Momenttabellen", 1986
[II]
[12]
ARBED, "AF 30/120 Verbundsttzen; Traglasttabellen", 1986

JRC Ispra, "Experimental and analytical research on the earthquake
resistant response of steelconcrete composite connections", Working
Group 3 of the Association of Structural Mechanics Laboratories
BIB1
73
^^SS^Â''^';vv^>s^-''l;fT.V
POLITECNICO DI MILANO
DIPARTIMENTO DI
INGEGNERIA STRUTTURALE
Piaz2a Leonardo da Vinci, 32
20133 Milano (Italy)
Appendix A
Test report of the Milan laboratory
Prof. G. BALLIO
75
PART I - EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS ON EXTERIOR JOINTS

Cyclic quasi- static tests were performed on 18 cross specimens built with an HE 300B
column and an HE 260A beam. The geometrical dimensions and the types of
specimens are listed in Fig. 1.1.
N=200KN
PQ
C3
<=>
CO
HE260A
3
3000
u
N=200KN
1330
Fig. 1.1 Specimens Geometrical D imensions
A1
77
H^J
Fig. 1.1 Specimens Types: bare steel, composite without slab, composite with slab
78
A2
The strength properties of the materials were measured on 15 tensile specimens for
steel profiles and on 30 standard cubes ( 15 cm side ) for concrete.
Specimens were built using profiles each coming from the same production unity.
Concreting was performed for all the specimens at the same time in three different
phases (one side second side slab). Thus the results were very closed each other,
the mean values were as following.
Beam HE260 A
fy=
318 Nimm2
fu = 419
Column HE300
fy
fu
Tendons 24 mm
Tendons 30 mm.
/mm2
fy = 318 Nimm2
fu = 425
Bolts M 30 mm
for flanges
for web
Nimm2
307 Nimm2
423
for web
2
Nimm
2
fy = 960 Nimm
2
fu =: 1040 Nimm
12%
eu =
725 Nimm2
fy = 780 Nimm2
fu = 14%
730
Nimm2
fy = 750 Imme
fu = lmo
=
Concrete
fc =
fc =
fc =
38 Nimm2
for first side
for second side
for slab
51 Nimm
39 Nimm
The different types of specimens and connections are shown in Fig. 1.2 and briefly
described as follows.
A3
79
weak joints
Two joints composite steel and concrete with slabs were tested.
The specimens were as follows:
Al
The connection of the beam with the column had two 25 mm pin welded to the
bottom flange of the beam. The pins enter in holes of a 80 mm thick plate welded
to the column flanges. Two rebars 20 mm were placed in the slab and welded to
the column flange.
Bl
A plate 10 mm thick welded to the column and bolted to the web of the beam (4
bolts M 20 mm) was the only steel connection between beam and column. Two
rebars were placed in the slab and connected to the column flange.
Al
Bl
s
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: A series series
80
A4
welded plate beam io column joints

Three specimens were tested. Plates 15 mm thick were connected by 10 mm side fillet
welds to the flanges of the beam and by 14 mm side fillet welds to the flanges of the
columns. Beam web were connected with two M 20 mm bolts to a 10 mm one side
plate welded to the column. Sffeners across the column (12.5 mm thick) were placed
at the beam flange levels. Specimen C I was bare steel, specimen C 2 was composite
without slab, specimen C 3 was composite with slab.
CI
to
19
C2
1
+
C3
]
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: C series
A5
81
end piales beam to column joints

Eight specimens were tested. Beams were fully welded to end plates, bolted to the
flange of the column. The specimens were as follows:
Dl
Bare steel without back plates on the panel zone. Stiffeners across the column
(12.5 mm thick) were placed at the beam flange levels. The end plate, 44 mm
thick, was connected to the column flange with 8 M 24 bolts placed on 4 rows
(two at the top and two at the bottom). The distance beetween the interior rows
was 330 mm, the distance beetween the exterior ones was 450 mm.
D2 Same as Dl, but composite without slab.

D3 Same as Dl, but composite with slab.
D4 Same as D2 but bolts were substituted by tendons of the same diameter going
across the concrete and bolted against the outside flange of the column. Four [
stiffeners, able to separate tendons from concrete, were welded to the web of the
column.
D5 Same as D4, but withot stiffeners. Plastic tubes separate tendons from concrete.
D6 Same as Dl, but semirigid. The end plate, 26 mm thick, was connected to the
column flange with 4 M 30 bolts placed on 2 rows with a distance of 350 mm.
D7 Same as D6 but composite without slab. In addition bolts were substituted by
tendons of the same diameter going across the concrete and bolted against the
outside flange of the column. Four [ stiffeners, able to separate tendons from
concrete, were welded to the web of the column.
D8 Same as D7, but without stiffeners. Plastic tubes separate tendons from concrete.
82
A6
ni
D2
;=;
D3
3
D4
H

Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: D series
83
D5
. 1 ..
D6
=(*
=4=
D7
1 -!>
D8
^
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: D series
84
A8
weided plate beam to column joints

Three specimens were tested. Beams flanges and web had full penetration welds to the
column flanges. No back plates on the panel zone were present. Stiffeners across the
column (12.5 mm thick) were placed at the beam flange levels. Specimen El was bare
steel, specimen E2 had the column composite but the beam bare steel, specimen E3
was composite without slab.
El
E2
bean
column
E3
3
-Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: E series
A9
85
end piates reduced beam io cuiuhili joint

Two specimens were tested. The connection was fully welded as for E series.
Specimen Fl was bare steel, specimen E2 was composite withot slab
F2
t
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: F series
86
A10
Tests were performed with the experimental equipments [ 1 ] of the Department of

Structural Engineering of Politecnico di Milano University. The procedures followed
during the tests and the rehalaboration of the results were in compliance with [ 2 ].
The experimental set-up is shown in Fig. 1.3. The column is in horizontal position. A
mechanical jack with a capacity of 1000 KN and a maximum elongation of 300 mm
impresses a controlled cyclic displacement to the top of the beam. The resultant force
is measured by a dynamometer. An additional jack impress an axial displacement to
the column in order to have an axial force in the column with a mean value of 200
KN. Displacements were measured with inductive trasducers. The following quantities
were continously recorded on a computer.
force
impressed by the jack to the top of the beam

applied to the column
displacement
at the top of the beam

at the 2 supports of the column
at the column at the level of the 2 flanges of the beam
A11
87
Fig. 1.3 Experimental Arrangement
---3---
displacement
force
--
-r
Fig. 1.3 Experimental Measures
88
A12
TU,
?
:^
...
dilUW
lW
_.
trcnt
plots of the total applied Bending Moment /Vi F L
versus total rotation = IL, beeing the relative displacement between the ends of
the beam. The rotation value corresponds to the storey drift divided by the height of
the storey.
l a w
lg
A.T
A:CC.
LXI'
Fig. 1.5 show the different pattern of the Total Dissipated Energy Ratio versus the
adimensional elongation as stated in [ 2 ].
The Energy Dissipated Ratio were not significant in specimens Al and Bl; thus the
corrisponding figures are omitted.
In Fig. 1.6 the most significant collapse mechanisnms are shown.
M3
89
"y.Y.y.yyyyy.':. .y.*... J
~"tt=*
_l
i_
_l
l_
.12
.12
Total Rotation
[rad]
.01
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN Al Bending Moment M(KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
^''""""'uimtll
+1
12
Total Rotation
l_
[radi
.12
.01 =
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN Bl Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q (rad)
90
A14
o
o
m
-l
-.12
-1
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN CI - Bending Moment M(KNm)

1
- 0 1 "i
Total Rotation [rad]
~i
.12
versus Total Rotation Q(rad)

1
O)
I
-.12
-l
.12
.01-
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN C2 - Bending Moment M {KNm ) versus Total Rotation t(rad )
A15
91
-.13
Total Rotation
[rad]
.11
.01-
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN C3 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad )
92
A16
Total Rotation
[rad]
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN Dl - Bending Moment M(KNm)
.12
.01
1-
Total Rotation
[rad]
.12
.01
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN D2 - Bending Moment M {KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
A17
93
-.12
Total Rotation
[rad]
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN D3 - Bending Moment M(KNm)
Total Rotation
[rad]
.01-
.12
.01-t
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN D4 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
94
A18
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN D5 - Bending Moment M(KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
-.13
.11
.01-
A19
95
Total Rotation
[rad]
.01=,
Total
flotation
[rad]
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN D8 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad )
96
A20
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN El - Bending Moment M(KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
oo
'
.12
-.12
.01-
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN E2 - Bending Moment M {KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
A21
97
o
o
m
-.12
Total Rotation
[rad]
.12
.01-
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN E3 - Bending Moment M {KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad )
98
A22
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN Fl Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q (rad )
o
o
m
i
i
o
o
i
j
*j
//
1 fl 111 lili
03
E
O
Ol
/ / / / /
c
OJ
m
o
o
CD
I
.12
KO
Total Rotation
[rad]
.01
Fig. 1.4 SPECIMEN F2 Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q (rad )
A23
99
5
Cycle Total Elongation Ratio
10
15
20
Fig. 1.5 SPECIMEN CI - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
f>-
_l
-J
5
10
15
Fig. 1.5 SPECIMEN C2 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
100
I -
20
A24
-f-
+-
--
5
10
15
I {
20
Fig. 1.5 SPECIMEN C3 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
A25
101
10
15
20
Fig. 1.5 SPECIMEN DI - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
3
E
10
15
Fig. 1.5 SPECIMEN D2 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
102
A26
"
"i
1_
_1
10
'
15
-1
Hf
-J
20

5
10
15
A27
20
103
1~
'
'
01
a
c.
o
-I
'
'
'
5
10
15
Fie. 1.5 SPECIMEN D5 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
~i
"
20
~i
-1
'
10
15
20
104
A28
Cycle Total Elongation
-1
10
15
20
10
15
20
Ratio
5
A29
105
T^
t=l
-I
5
10
15
Fig. 1.5 SP ECIMEN El - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
~i
J
-1
bean
colLrm
5
10
15
Fig. 1.5 SP ECIMEN E2 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
106
20
[_
-1
20
A30
2 I
^
ra
10
'
'
'
'
15
20
Fig. 1.5 SPECIMEN E3 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
A31
107
"
1-
--
4-
-J
l_
-I
10
'
'
-i
15
20
Fig. 1.5 SPECIMEN Fl - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
5
10
15
so
Fig. 1.5 SPECIMEN F2 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
108
A32
r"
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN Al - Failure Mechanism
>>
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN Bl - Failure Mechanism
A33
109
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN Cl - Failure Mechanism
< \
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN C2 - Failure Mechanism
110
A34
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN C3 - Failure Mechanism
A35
111
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN Dl - Failure Mechanism
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN D2 - Failure Mechanism
112
A36
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN D 4 - Failure Mechanism
A37
113
114
A38
if- -'
TrVî
A39
115
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN El - Failure Mechanism
is' "'
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN E2 - Failure Mechanism
116
A40
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN E3 - Failure Mechanism
A41
117
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN Fl - Failure Mechanism
VC*
Fig. 1.6 SPECIMEN F2 - Failure Mechanism
118
A42
In
order
to
compare
the experimentai
results, the following q u a a i u i u e s w i l l
be
introduced a n d compared:
G l o b a l Flexibility of the joint in the elastic field measured as the slope in

M experimental diagram (rad/KN m)
My C onventional
elastic limit (KN m) measured on the experimental diagram
as indicated in [ 2 ] .
My
corresponds to the intersection between the
elastic slope and the line tangent to the plastic branch having a slope of
1/10 of the elastic one
Qy
T o t a l rotation corresponding to My
M2.5
B e n d i n g M o m e n t (KN m)
M a x i m u m Total Rotation reached during the test and allowing
corresponding to a total rotation = 2 . 5 %

three
c o m p l e t e cycles without failure

Mu
/ Qy
Qu 12.5
B e n d i n g m o m e n t corresponding to
C onventional m a x i m u m ductility ratio
Ductility
margin
in respect
the
limit of
2.5
assumed
by
many
researchers as the m a x i m u m value of storey drift allowable during a severe

seismic event.
In F i g . 1.7 the values of the above quantities are listed for each specimen.
Specimen A l has a significant non symmetric behaviour; the table reports the values
c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the m a x i m u m resistence of the joint.
T h e b e h a v i o u r of the other specimens is practically symmetric; in the table the m e a n
value of the various quantities are Usted.
A43
119
'
rad
KNm
My
Mu
^2.5%
KNm
KNm
KNm
==
==
%
Q
2.5%
==
7.4
3.0
2.3
8.0
1.8
445.
430.
500.
400.
4.8
4.9
1.9
340.
465.
500.
480.
460.
350.
7.3
7.4
7.4
2.9
6.0
6.2
7.5
7.0
6.2
3.0
2.4
5.0
6.2
4.9
5.0
1(T5
Al
Bl
3.50
4.00
110.
110.
0.38
0.45
Cl
C2
3.40
2.95
2.20
272.
445.
440.
0.92
3.30
2.70
2.10
2.70
2.80
5.00
4.40
4.70
300.
365.
410.
370.
360.
250.
210.
220.
0.99
0.98
0.86
1.00
1.01
1.25
0.92
1.03
360.
430.
480.
420.
430.
280.
250.
370.
380.
0.94
1.24
395.
285.
400.
8.8
7.1
3.3
3.4
1.10
295.
400.
430.
8.3
8.6
E3
3.75
3.35
2.90
8.5
7.7
3.4
FI
F2
4.00
3.20
230.
325.
0.92
1.04
280.
380.
300.
335.
9.8
8.6
10.6
8.3
3.9
3.4
C3
Dl
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
D7
D8
El
E2
1.31
0.97
330.
=
2.5
2.0
2.5
Fig. 1.7 Experimenial Results
120
A44
1.1 The Experimental Behaviour of Weak Connections
With reference to the collapse mechanisms shown in Fig. 1.6 and to the results listed in
Fig. 1.7 the following may be noted.
The plastic hinge always formed in the connections for a limited value of the
bending moment. The overall behaviour of specimen Bl appears better than the
one of specimen Al. Nevertheless a better quality of the welds connecting the
pins may probably improve the strength of the joints type A.
1.2 The Experimental Behaviour of welded plate connection
The bare steel specimen behaves very well; the plastic hinge forms in the panel
zone; cycles are stable.
Concrete gives an improvement of rigidity and increases the strength of the panel
zone. As a consequence the welding of the plate to the column flange may
become critical as the ductility concerns.
Such a type of joint may be used only guaranteing a very good control of
welding procedures.
A45
121
1.3 The Experimental Behaviour of End Plates Connection
The specimens with bolted thick end plate (Dl - D2 - D3) behave as expected.
The connection had a sufficient restence in order to allow the formation of the
plastic hinge in the beam. Concrete gave an improvement both to stiffness and
strength of the joint.
The specimens with the bolted tendons and thick end plate (D4 - D5) behave in a
different way. The elastic limit was reached in the tendons causing a loss of the
stiffness of the whole joint. This was due to the fact that was impossible to find
tendons with a material grade as specified in the design. Permanent deformations
of tendons caused also a gap beetween the end plate and the column flange. Such
a gap became greater as the total rotation of the joint was increasing.
In the semirigid joint (specimen D6) the end plate becomes plastic and the bolts
collapsed because the bending effects caused by the deformation of the plate.
Ductility and energy dissipation are poor.
In specimens with flexible end plate and tendons (D7 - D8) the elastic strength of
tendons was not sufficient. Therefore the plastic behaviour of the tendons and
their permanent deformations did not allow energy dissipation.
Summing up the following conclusions may be given.
From a qualitative point of vew it may be stated that thick end plate connection
gives good results if the bolts are stressed in the elastic field. Semirigid
connections have a worse behaviour. Tendons may be used only if adeguate
strength is provided. During the specimen construction it was not possible to find
tendons compling with the design requirements.
122
A46
From a quantitative point of vew the tests have shown that concrete increases the
performances of the joint if the plastic hinge does not forai in the connection.
Attention must be paied to the material properties of the bolts and/or tendons.
The joint must be overdesigned according to Eurocode provisions in order to
allow the formation of the plastic hinges in the beam rather than the connection.
L4 The Experimental Behaviour of Welded Beam to Column Joint

In bare steel specimen plasticity was reached both in the panel zone and in the
beam. Local failure mechanism near the welds occurred due to secondary bending
effects caused by the deformation of the panel zone.
If the stiffness of panel zone is increased by the addition of concrete, plastic
hinge forms in the beam, without significant permanent deformations of the panel
zone or cracking of the welds.
For concrete specimen both panel both panel zone and beam dissipate energy in
plastic field.
Summing up it may be stated that concrete gives a good contribution increasing
stiffness without a significant loss of ductility.
A47
123
1.5 The Experimental Behaviour of Welded Reduced Beam

The reduction of the flange caused a loss of strength but was able to avoid the
panel shear mechanism: the plastic hinge located in the beam.
As for the previous specimens concrete gives a good contribution both to stiffness
and strength.
1.6 References
[1] Bailio G. and Zandonini R. (1985) An Experimental Equipment to Test Steel

Structural Members and Subassemblages Subject to Cyclic Loads Ingegneria Sismica,
Anno II, 2, pp 25-40
[2] ECCS, CECM, EKS Technical Committee 1, WG 1.3 - Seismic Design (1986)
Recommended Testing Procedure for Assessing the Behaviour of Structural Steel
Elements under Cyclic Loads Publication n. 45
124
A48
PART - EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS ON INTERIOR JOINTS

Cyclic quasi- static tests were performed on 20 cross specimens built with an HE 300B
column and an HE 260A beam. The geometrical dimensions and the types of
specimens are listed in Fig. ..
N=200KN
i
2
HE260A
2740
2806
N=2Q0KN
Fig. 1.1 Specimens Geometrical Dimensions
A49
125
Fig. II. 1 Specimens Types: bare steel, composite without slab, composite with slab
126
A50
The strength properties of the materials were measured on 16 tensile specimens for
steel profiles and on 80 standard cubes ( 1 5 cm side ) for concrete.
Specimens were built using profiles each coming from the same production unity.
Concreting was performed for all the specimens at the same time in three different
phases (one side - second side slab). Thus the results were very closed each other, the
mean values were as follows.
Beam - HE 260 A
y = 302 Nimm1
= 416
Column - HE 300
for flanges
1
Nimm
y = 282 Nimm1
fu = 404
for flanges
Nimm
fy = 307 Nimm1
Bolts M 30
for web
fu = 423
Nimm1
fy = 960
Nimm1
fu = 1040
N/mm1
= 12%
Concrete
fc = 38 /mm1
1
for first side
fc = 33 /mm
for second side
fc = 27 /mm1
for slab
The different types of specimens and connections are shown in Fig. II.2 and briefly
described as follows.
A51
127
weak joints
Three joints composite steel and concrete with slabs were tested. No additional rebars
were placed in the slab and connected to the column flange.
Gl The connection of the beam with the column had two 25 mm pin welded to the
bottom flange of the beam. The pins enter in holes of a 80 mm thick plate welded
to the column flanges.
G2 The connection of the beams with the column had end plates welded to the
beam. The end plates enter in a special notchs of the 80 mm thick plates welded
to the column flanges.
HI A plate 10 mm thick welded to the column and bolted to the web of the beam (4
bolts M 27 mm) was the only steel connection between beam and column.
Gl
LU
Fig. II.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: G series
128
A52
G2
E3
Fig. .2 Steel and Composite Specimens: G series
Fig. .2 Steel and Composite Specimens: series
A53
129
welded
beam
TO column joints
Five specimens were tested. Beams flanges had full penetration welds to column
flanges; beam webs were connected with two M27 mm bolts to a 12 mm one side
plate welded to the column.
11
Bare steel without back plates on the panel zone. Stiffeners across the column,
12.5 mm thick, make continous the beam flanges.
12
Same as II but composite without slab.
13
Same as II but composite with slab.
14
Composite with slab. Two back plates each 15 mm thick welded to the panel web
and without the stiffeners corresponding to the beam flanges.
15
Same as 14 but with stiffeners corresponding to beam flanges.
130
A54
Il
I-ES
12
13
Fig. .2 Steel and Composite Specimens: I series
A55
131
14
+ S
Lp
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: I series
132
A56
end plates beiii column joints

Seven specimens were tested. Beams were fully welded to 50 mm thick end plates,
bolted with 2+2 M 30 bolts (classs 10.9) to the flanges of the columns. The distance
between bolts was 340 mm.
Jl
- -
} - +
- -
-4
J2
J3
1
- 1 -)
1
-t-
- 1-
-4
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: J scries
A57
133

Jl
(12.5 mm thick) were placed at the top and the bottom of the end plate at a
distance of 465 mm, thus nearly doubling the dimension of the panel in respect to
I specimens.
J2
Same as Jl, but composite without slab.
J3
Same as Jl, but composite with slab.
J4
Bare steel; stiffners were substituted by two exterior plates (10 mm thick) welded
to the ends of column flanges.
J5
Same as J4, but composite with slab.
J6
Same as J3, with the addition of two back plates 10 mm thick welded to the web
of the column (stiffeners are present).
J7
Same as J6 but without stiffeners across the column.
J4
+ -
Fig. .2 Steel and Composite Specimens: J series
134
A58
J5
J6
f-
-11
- I -
+
I
J7
-1
f=l
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: J senes
<V59
135
end plaies reduced beam iu column joint

Four specimens were tested. Beams were fully welded to 40 mm. thick end plates,
bolted with 2+2 M 30 bolts (classs 10.9) to the flanges of the columns. The distance
between bolts was 340 mm.
kl
M^tfWJMIMJM^^^
<^m^m^mm
kZ
4 3
k3
E3
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens:
136
senes
A60

Kl
(12.5 mm thick) were placed at the top and the bottom of the end plate at a
distance of 430 mm, thus nearly doubling the dimension of the panel in respect to
I specimens.
K2 Same as Kl, but composite with slab.

K3 Composite with slab. Stiffeners were substituted by two 10 mm thick plates
welded to the ends of column flanges.
K4 Composite without slab. The column web was unstiffened and without back
plates.
k4 t
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: K series
A61
137
,-_*:
u
s beam
to interrupted column joint
One specimen (named LI) was tested. The beam was continous and the column were
interrupted and welded to 30 mm thick end plates. They were bolted to the beam
flanges with 2+2 M24 bolts, class 10.9; The distance between the bolts was 380 mm;
stiffeners welded to the beam gave the continuity of the column flanges.
LI t
L-
+.
Fig. 1.2 Steel and Composite Specimens: L series
138
A62
Tesis were performed with 'die experimental equipments [ 1 ] of the Department f

Structural Engineering of Politecnico di Milano University. The procedures followed
during the tests and the rehalaboration of the results were in compliance with [ 2 ].
The experimental set-up is shown in Fig. n.3.The column is in horizontal position; two
tendons impress a force of 200 KN. A mechanical jack with a capacity of 1000 KN
and a maximum elongation of 600 mm impresses a controlled cyclic displacement to
the top of
the beam. The resultant
force
is measured
by a
dynamometer.
Displacements were measured with inductive trasducers. The following quantities were
continously recorded on a computer.
force
impressed by the jack to the top of the beam

given by the restraint at the bottom of the beam
impressed by the tendons to the column
displacement
at the top of the beam

at the bottom of the beam
at the column in the direction of the applied force
at the 2 supports of the column
length variation
A63
of the 2 diagonals of the panel
139
Fig. .3 Experimental Arrangement
---
- -
--
-- - # - &
displacement
force
Fig. .3 Experimental Measures
140
64
The Fig IL 4 show the different plots of the tola! applied Bending Moment M = F L
versus total rotation = v IL, beeing the relative displacement between the ends of
the beam. The rotation value corresponds to the storey drift divided by the height of
the storey. The bending moment M corresponds to the double of the bending value
applied to one beam.
Fig .5 show the different relations between the total applied Bending Moment
M = F L versus the shear deformation of the panel zone = a v s where:
a
_ ^db2 + dc2
dbdc
vs the measured value of the elongation of the panel diagonal

db , dc the length of the panel
Fig. .6 show the different pattern of the Total D issipated Energy Ratio versus the
adimensional elongation as stated in [ 2 ].
The shear deformation Qs and the Energy D issipated Ratio were not sgnificant in
specimens Gl, G2, HI; thus the corrisponding figures are omitted.
In Fig. .7 the most significant collapse mechanisnms are shown.
(V65
141
^"'"""""MMIII^""****"*'^
. 4 ^
l_
_i
.13
Total Rotation Irid]
.11
"
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN Gl Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Total Rotation B(rad)

~
Ly.v.v.y.v.~v^~v.y.v.v.v."J
T2^P
rL
_i
.12
/iflgftn
Total Rotation
[rad]
[_
.12
.01=
Fig. II.4 SPECIMEN G2 Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q (rad )
142
A66
~i
-1
LU
~>
OJ
rf
'
'
'
i_
Total flotation [radj
-1
-1
.01-
.13
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN HI - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation 6(rad)
A67
143
-*--
"
c
OJ
m
-1
-.12
_j
.13
.01-,
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN II - Bending Moment M{KNm) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)

ol
"
"
L " t " J
o
o
cu
-i-
.12
.12
.01-
Fig. II.4 SPECIMEN 12 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad )
144
A68
Fig. H.4 SPECIMEN 13 - Bending Moment M(KNm)
"
-L-
. J
O'
o
O
cu
'
*>
to
.12
--
1 .
1 --
. i-
. .
J
.12
.01-,
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN 14 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad )
A69
145

Fig. .4 SPECIMEN 15 - Bending Moment M(KNm)
146
01
versus Total Rotation B(rad)
A70
VL I
.12
"
.12
.01
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN Jl Bending Moment M(KNm)

"T
r~
"
versus Total Rotation B(rad)

1
f
w
(>.
7_
.12
J
1_
01 "
.12
Fig. II.4 SPEC IMEN J2 Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q (rad )
A71
147
Total Rotation (rad]
0 1 "
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN J3 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
Total Hotation [rad]
Fig. II.4 SPECIMEN J4 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
148
A72
Total Rotation
[rad]
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN J5 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
_I
-l
-J
-.12
Total Rotation
[rad]
.12
.01
Fig. II.4 SPECIMEN J6 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Total Rotation Q(rad )
A73
149
o.
o
-
-.11
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN J7 - Bending Moment M(KNm)
150
i_
.13
01-.
A74
I_
I ..
I.
rti
. ..,
.
I
!
oL
01
in
_l
.12
L.
.12
.01
Fig. II.4 SPECIMEN Kl Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
-
i
.1 i
!1
i|
s
.12
1_
1_
_J
Total Rotation [rid]

.01
Fig. II.4 SPECIMEN K2 Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
A75
.12
151

.01
Fig. U.4 SP ECIMEN K3 - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
Total Hotatlon [rad]

.01Fig. .:4 SPECIMEN K4 - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
152
A76
Fig. .4 SPECIMEN LI - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Total Rotation Q(rad)
hrr
153
Sheared Panel Rotation [rad]
.01=.
Fig. .5 SPECIMEN II - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Shear Rotation Q,(rad)
i.
. L__
1 .
.1
1 . . ..
-.13
.11
.01-_
Fig. II.5 SPECIMEN 12 - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Shear Rotation Qs(rad)
154
A78
Ete
-I
.26
.22
.02
Fig. ..5 SPECIMEN 13 - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Shear Rotation Qt(rad)

Fig. II.5 SPECIMEN 14 - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Shear Rotation Qs(rad)
A79
155
ol
<
CD |
~l
- r -
*t
.12
Sheared P anel Rotation [rad]
01
.12
"-
Fig. II.5 SPECIMEN 15 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Shear Rotation Arad)
156
A80
y EU
il
_1
1_
_I
l_
.12
-.12
Sheared Panel R o t a t i o n
.01-,
[rad]
Fig. .5 SPECIMEN Jl - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Shear Rotation Qs (rad )
-|
!"
T"
4-
Ol
o
Cu
I.
. J _ ..J
J . _. I . .
I_.
1 ..
- I
-.13
Sheared
Panel
Rotation
[rad]
01
"
.11
Fig. II.5 SPECIMEN J2 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Shear Rotation Qs(rad)
A81
157
Fig. .5 SPECIMEN J3 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Shear Rotation Qs (rad )
'
'
'
-1
-f-
-I
.12
Sheared Panel
flotation
[rad]
01=.
Fig. II.5 SPECIMEN J4 - Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Shear Rotation Qs (rad)
158
A82
'
'
'
r
*+#
i_
_l
l_
.11
.13
Sheared Panel Rotation (rad]
.01
Fig. IL5 SPECIMEN J5 Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Shear Rotation Q s (rad )
tLUAj!uM|UhM*hUjiU!tJ
#+
I i
1 _
.12
.12
.01
Fig. II.5 SPECIMEN J6 Bending Moment M (KNm ) versus Shear Rotation Q s (rad)
A83
159
-i
i_
-I
-f-
gp
-4-
c
m
-.12
Sheared Panel Rotation
[rad]
Fig. .5 SPECIMEN J7 - Bending Moment M(KNm)
160
.12
.01-
versus Shear Rotation , (rad)
A84
" 1 i
[_
j_
i . ._ j
|i
i .
I
i
en !
c
s
c:
.11
'
'
.01
_J
.13
Fig. .5 SPECIMEN Kl Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Shear Rotation Q,(rad)

i
Shiarid Pinil Rotation [rid]
.01
Fig. II.5 SPECIMEN K2 Bending Moment MiKNm) versus Shear Rotation Qs(rad)
A85
161
Fig. .5 SPECIMEN K3 - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Shear Rotation Q,(rad)

"~!
I I
.1 . .
I.
I . .
.1
L-. --!
-. L
. . . I . I
-.13
.11
.01=
Fig. II.5 SPECIMEN K4 - Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Shear Rotation Qs(rad)
162
A86
[~
i
i
lf
t,i4
Ui
.26
i_
'
'
'
i_
Sheared Panel R o t a t i o n
[rad]
'
.22
.02,
Fig. .5 SPEC IMEN LI Bending Moment M(KNm) versus Shear Rotation Q,(rad)
A87
163
10
15
20
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN II - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
4J
"
10
15
20
Fig. II.6 SPECIMEN 12 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
164
A88
1 1
'
L'
+
U m
cr ~*
pi
ii
I
.
C
O
M_J
<
41
IO
e
u
4>
__^
IO
41
01
L.
_j
l_
20
10
15
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN 13 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
lllllllla4Jd*jAAIU*Ux*J
" "
_1
l_
10
15
Cycle Total Elongation Hatlo
20
Fig. II.6 SPECIMEN 14 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation rauo
A89
165
10
15
20
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN 15 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
166
A90
-f
..... _j
m.
i
-i-
-\
;zr
1_
-J
1_
10
15
Cycle Total Elongation Hatlo
-1
r T-
20
Fig. II.6 SPECIMEN Jl - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
--
_i
tr ~ |
CB
V.
1_
-1
10
15
20
Fig. II.6 SPECIMEN J2 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
A91
167
- A^2
-
_l
"
-I
r-
10
15
20
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN J3 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
-f-
*>;
-i-
-.1
-L-
10
15
20
Fig. II.6 SPECIMEN J4 - Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
168
A92
*"
i
<
^
(
'
i
i
M
<
TD
_
_
10
15
20
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN J5 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
tf\
.y.y.y.y.'
i . ,
i.
M1
J
U
10
15
20
Fig. II.6 SPECIMEN J6 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
A93
169
TIT'
. .
-I
-I
L
10
L
15
-J
20
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN J7 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
170
A94
-,
1 - - 1
-I
CE **
-. ...
S'
-1
-1
'
10
15
20
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN Kl Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
i
i .
,
a
>>
MJI
9
a
-
0
-J
1
1
I
10
19
20
Fig. II.6 SPEC IMEN K2 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
A95
171
'
'
'
'
'
"
'
!!:
B >
i
I
i
ca
c.
MJ
l_
_i
10
IS
Cycle .Total Elongation Ratio
20
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN K3 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
C\J
CE
>
c
tu
c
LU
dl
3
C_
<
TD
41
_
, "^
3
CJ
'
^ * " ^
,*^
4J
4J
4>
10
15
20
Fig. II.6 SPECIMEN K4 Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
172
A96
...'
i
i
..+..
i f
Ml
10
15
Fig. .6 SPECIMEN LI Cumulated Energy ratio versus Elongation ratio
A97
20
173
Fig. II.7 SPECIMEN Gl - Failure Mechanism
Fi. II.7 SPECIMEN Gl - Failure Mechanism
174
A98
Fig. II.7 SPECIMEN Hl - Failure Mechanism
A99
175
Fig. II.7 SPECIMEN II - Failure Mechanism
Fis?. II.7 SPECIMEN 12 - Failure Mechanism
176
A100
Fig. II.7 SPECIMEN 13 - Failure Mechanism
Fig. II. 7 SPECIMEN 14 - Failure Mechanism
A101
177
178
A102
Fig. II.7 SPECIMEN J1 - Failure Mechanism
Fis;. II.7 SPECIMEN J2 - Failure Mechanism
A103
179
Fig. 11.7 SPECIMEN J4 - Failure Mechanism
180
A104
A105
181
182
A106
Fig. .7 SPECIMEN Kl - Failure Mechanism
A107
183
Fig. II.7 SPECIMEN K3 - Failure Mechanism
Fig. II.7 SPECIMEN K4 - Failure Mechanism
184
A108
Fig. II.7 SPECIMEN LI - Failure Mechanism
A109
185
In order to compare the experimental resuls, the follo wing quantities will b e
introduced and compared:
Global Flexibility of the joint in the elastic field measured as the slope in
M experimental diagram (rad/KN m )
Qs
Flexibility of the panel zone in the elastic field measured as the slope in
Qs M experimental diagram (rad/KN m )
My C onventional elastic limit (KN m ) measured o n t h e experimental diagram

as indicated in [ 2 ] . My corresponds to t h e intersection between the
elastic slope and the line tangent to the plastic branch having a slope of
1/10 of the elastic o n e
Qy
Total rotation corresponding to My
M2.5
Bending Moment (KN m)
Maximum Total Rotation reached during the test and allowing three
corresponding to a total rotation = 2.5%
complete cycles without failure

Mu
Bending moment corresponding to Qu
Qu I Qy C onventional maximum ductility ratio

Qu 12.5
Ductility margin in respect the limit of 2.5 % assumed by many

researchers as the maximum value of storey drift allowable during a severe
seismic event.
In Fig. .8 the values of the above quantities are listed for each specimen.
Specimen Gl has a significant non symmetric behaviour; the table reports the values
corresponding to the maximum resistence of the joint.
The behaviour of the other specimens is practically symmetric; in the table the mean
value of the various quantities are listed.
186
A110
My
rad
KNm
rad
KNm
IO"5
IO -5
Gl
7.00
0.00
45.
G2
3.75
3.10
0.00
2.5%
Mu
%
%
2.5%
KNm
KNm
55.
0.30
0.21
==
0.00
150.
0.47
170.
90.
4.2
2.9
3.6
2.88
2.25
1.50
1.55
1.30
1.55
1.08
0.70
0.75
0.50
260.
470.
490.
700.
720.
0.75
1.06
300.
540.
600.
430.
470.
>13.6
>9.5
>13.0
4.2
2.2
>4.0
>4.0
>4.0
==
480.
650.
850.
>10.0
>10.0
>10.0
6.5
2.1
2.50
2.00
1.37
2.25
1.66
1.32
1.77
0.94
0.60
0.40
0.25
0.00
0.37
1.00
360.
500.
520.
580.
660.
700.
720.
1.10
0.92
1.10
420.
600.
600.
620.
740.
800.
660.
590.
610.
570.
760.
840.
860.
560.
>10.0
>10.0
>10.0
4.5
4.5
<4.5
6.5
11.1
>10.0
>14.1
3.4
4.1
>4.0
>4.0
>4.0
1.8
1.8
<1.8
2.6
1.25
0.78
0.00
1.00
320.
500.
560.
500.
0.96
0.88
0.98
1.23
460.
620.
660.
530.
525.
560.
830.
530.
>10.0
>10.0
9.0
>10.4
K3
K4
3.00
1.75
1.75
2.45
LI
2.63
1.30
330.
1.02
440.
330.
Hl
II
12
13
14
15
Jl
J2
J3
J4
J5
J6
J7
Kl
K2
KNm
0.73
1.00
0.95
0.90
1.00
0.71
1.31
750.
<4.9
5.9
2.6
0.8
>10.0
>11.4
9.2
>8.1
>4.0
>4.0
3.7
3.2
9.0
8.8
3.6
Fig. II.8 Experimental Results
A111
187
C l The Experimentai Behaviour of Weak Connections
With reference to the collapse mechanisms shown in Fig. .7 and to the results listed
in Fig. .8 the following may be noted.
The plastic hinge always formed in the connections for a limited value of the
bending moment The overall behaviour of specimen HI appears better than the
ones of specimens Gl and G2. Nevertheless a better quality of the welds
connecting the pins may probably improve the resistence of the joints type G.
Additional rebars in the concrete slab may also significantly increase the
performances of the connections type G and H.
.2 The Experimental Behaviour of Welded Beam to Column Joint

With reference to the collapse mechanisms shown in Fig. II.7 and to the results listed
in Fig. II. 8 the following may be noted.
In specimens II - 12 - 13 the plastic hinge forms in the panel. The cyclic
behaviour is very stable and ductile. Concrete gives a very good contribution both
to elastic rigidity and to the resistance: in speciman 13 the panel zone has an
elastic limit pratically equal to the elastic bending capacity of the beam (250
KNm). Its shear deformability is less than the 50% of the bare steel panel zone.
At 2.5 % storey drift, the resistance is 20 % greater than the design value My.
Strong back plates without transverse stiffeners (specimen 14) may be an
acceptable solution. If compared with specimen 13 (with transverse stiffeners and
without back plates) its rigidity is pratically equal, its resistance is much greater
(40% more). Nevertheless its ciclic behaviour, even stable in the range of
practical interest, is less ductlile.
188
A112
Strong back plates with transverse siiffcucii (specimen 15) caused a premature
failure due to the collapse of the welds connecting the beam flange to the column.
The solution may appear critical and perhaps unaccettable if a severe plan of
quality control for welding is not accomplished.

From a qualitative point of vew, it may be stated that concrete gives a good
contribution both to resistance and rigidity of panel zone without reducing its
ductility.
From a quantitative point of vew, the tests have shown that concrete gives an
extrastrength of 80% to the panel zone reducing of about the 50% its
deformability. Of course it is not possible to generalize such a results without
other experimental analysis on different profiles sizes.
In principle, transverse stiffeners to the column may be substituted by strong back
plates. It is thus possible to increase the strength of the panel zone up to the
plastic bending capacity of the beams. The web of the column may be stretched
away from the column flange, limiting the ductility ratio. For the above reason
such a solution must be carefully studied both experimentally and numerically.
A structural solution considering concrete, strong back plates on the web,
transverse stiffeners in the column does not appear acceptable without a very
severe control of welding. The test has shown an increase of strength but a brittle
behaviour due to local collapse of welds.
.3 The Experimental Behaviour of End Plates Connection
A113
189
in Hg. li. the following may be noted.

In specimens Jl - J2 - J3 the plastic hinge forms in the panel; some plastic
deformations in the column flanges are also present; the end plate is practically
indeformed. Comparing the behaviour of the welded specimens (I series) it must
be noted that the dimensions of the panel zone are different (db = 465 mm
instead of 225 mm). As a consequence the shear flexibility decrease
significantly to 60%, 46% , 57% for J l , J2, J3 respectively. The total flexibility is
reduced, but not in the same proportion due to the local elastic deformations of
the bolted connections. The increase of resistance is not so evident: it is
significant in the bare steel specimen ( approximately 38%); it is negligible for
the composite specimens.
Exterior plates show a greater shear rigidity in respect to the stiffener solution;
from the other hand the bolted connection rigidity is reduced and the benefit on
the total rigidity of the specimen is negligible (compare J4 with Jl; J5 with J3)
The resistance increases significantly , but the ductility reduces because the
collapse is caused by the bolt failure and/or the local plastic failure of the
column flange around the bolt hole.
Comparing J6 to J3, back plates give a significant increase (30%) to the
resistance.The shear panel mechanism does not take place. The flanges of the
columns fail significantly reducing the ductility.
Back plates without stiffeners may be a convenient solution. It is possible to
reach the same level of strength allowed by stiffeners; ductility is reduced but it
is greater than for J4 - J5. The global rigidity is also reduced.
From a qualitative point of vew it may be stated that thick end plates are
acceptable even without locally increasing the thickness of the column flanges.
Transverse stiffners located at the top and bottom of the end plates enlarge the
190
A114
panei zone increasing strength and rigidity. Concrete increases the performances
of the joint; the presence of the slab does not influence very much strength but it
is useful for ductility.
From a quantitative point of vew the test have shown that concrete increases the
strength of the panel zone of about the 50% without reducing the ductile
behaviour.
Exterior plates substituting the transverse stiffeners are able to increase the
strength but reduce significantly the ductility. They forbid the formation of the
panel shear mechanism and cause a significant reduction of ductility. The same
effects are given by back plates welded to the web of the column.
A structural solution considering concrete and exterior or back plates may
probably be found, looking for a compromise between the ductility demand and
the strength of the panel zone and of the bolted connection.
.4 The Experimental Behaviour of End Plates Reduced Beam

in Fig. II.8 the following may be noted.
The reduction of the flange was not sufficient to substitute the panel shear
mechanism with a plastic hinge located in the beam. For this reason the behaviour
of specimens Kl and K2 is very similar to the one of specimend Jl and J2 The
incease of shear flexibility and the decrease of strenth may be explained by the
reduction of the shear panel size.
The specimen K3 has exterior plates: it does not reach the same strength of the
similar joint J5 but it shows a sufficient ductility. This fact is another proof of the
interest of the solution.
A115
191
The specimen K4 is the oniy one without any device reinforcing die panei zone
(no transverse stiffeners, no exterior or back plates). Its behaviour shows that
concrete alone is able to give a design bending capacity of the same order of
magnitude of the one provided by tranverse stiffeners, allowing the good
ductility of panel mechanism.
Summing up the most interesting results concrete seems to be able to allow the
elimination of transverse stiffeners, if one wish to design the joint for panel action. In
other words the panel shear strength in the composite structure is not reduced if the
stiffeners are absent; of course this statement must be confirmed by other tests on
different panel sizes before being accepted for design purposes.
.5 The Experimental Behaviour of Continous Beam Connection

Only one test was performed. The panel zone has a size comparable with the ones of
specimens of I series but its thickness is only 6.5 mm instead of 11 mm
(approximately 60%). Its design bending capacity My is greater than 80% of the the
corresponding one of specimen 14 and its ductility is equivalent. Shear rigidity is
decreased of approximately the 30% thus increasing the total flexibility of about the
15%
Summing up it seems that the composite solution of this kind of joint may have great
advantages in the economy of the construction.
192
A116
.6 References
[1] Bailio G. and Zandonini R. (1985) An Experimental Equipment to T est Steel

Structural Members and Subassemblages Subject to Cyclic Loads Ingegneria Sismica,
Anno , 2, pp 25-40
[2] ECCS, CECM, EKS Technical Committee 1, WG 1.3 - Seismic D esign (1986)
Recommended T esnng Procedure for Assessing the Behaviour of Structural Steel
Elements under Cyclic Loads Publication n. 45
U17
193
PART IH - COMPUTED AND EXPERIMENTAL STRENGTH

The design strength were computed according to EUROCOD E formulas. The
following criteria were be adopted.
Ultimate bending capacity of the beam

For the bare steel specimens the ultimate plastic bending moment of the beam
was computed according to the nominal properties of the section ( Wpl = 920 cm3
for HE A 260) and the actual value of yield strength ( fy =31.8 KNIcm1 and
fy = 30.2 KN lem1 for exterior and interior joints respectively).
For F and series the flange reduction was designed considering a linear
distribution of bending moment. Thus the same value of the applied force causes,
in principle, the atteinmnt of the ultimate capacity both at the reduced section
and at the end of the beam where the section is fully effective.
In composite joints without slab the rebars were not connected to the column.
Thus the ultimate bending capacity of the beam was assumed equal to the one of
bare steel specimens, disregarding concrete in tension.
In composite exterior joints with slab the two 20 mm upper rebars were
connected to the columns. Thus the ultimate bending capacity of the beam was
computed according to the properties of the composite section.
In composite interior joints with slab the only rebars across the column were
eight 6 mm bars. Their contribution was neglected assuming the bending ultimate
capacity of the beam equal to the one of the bare steel beam.
A118
195
Ultimate capacity of the connection

The strength of the connections located beetween the beam and the column flange was
evaluated considering the most weak element, but disregarding:
the local effects on the column flange caused by bolts in tension;
the tensile stresses in the column at the junction beetween the web and the flange.
Strength of the panel zone

The panel strength may be computed by the formula:
V
r
w ~ nw
+ V
^
w,c
Mw = Vw dc
where:
Aw = dc tw with dc = 28.1 cm is the depth of the column an tw is the thickness
of the web and of back plates, if any. It was assumed tw = 11 mm for all the
specimens except for LI (tw = 7.5 mm), for 14 and 15 (rw = 41 mm), for J4, J5,
J6, J7 andK3 (rw = 3 1 mm);
fy = 31.8 KN/cm2 for exterior joints and 30.7 KNIcm1 for interior joint;
db = 27.5 cm for joints type C ; 23.75 cm for joints type D, E, F and I; 46.5 cm
for joint type J; 34.0 cm for joint type K;
Vwc
taking into account the contribution of the concrete, computed as:

0.85/ c
Vw,c =
with fc
196
cCOSCt
the cubic strength ( 4.0 KNlem1 for exterior joints and 3.5 KNIcm2 for
A119
interior joints); Ac = 5 : 30 = 150 cm " the cross section of the ideal compression
diagonal; cosa = 29/^29 2 + dc2.
The experimental results were given assuming the total applied moment at the section
located at the intersection beetween the beam and the column axes.
In order to compare the results the strength of the beam and of the connection must be
multiplied by the ratio:
1330
= 1.13
1330-150
for exterior j oin ts
a =
2806
= 1.12
2806-300
for interior joints
In addition for the interior joints there are two beams and two connections. Thus the
value of must be doubled in order to compare the computed bending moment with
the total applied bending moments. Thus, for interior joints, = 2.24.
In order to compare the moments applied to the panel zone one must consider the
shear forces coming from the beams and the columns.
In fact:
* =
2MS
vb
yc
dcdb
db
dc
J_
V3
That is:
M = 1 -
dc
db
Lb
Lc
<MW
Thus the panel strength must be divided by the factor:

= 1 -
db
with:
Lh = 1330 mm
Lc = 3000 mm
for exterior joint
Lb = 2806 mm
Lc = 2740 mm
for interior joint
A120
197
In Fig. HI. 1 and .2 ihe most significam resuiis of the comparison are reponed. If
omitted, the strength of the connection is greater than 1.2 times the strength of the
beam. The following may be noted.
when the plastic hinge forms in the beam, the computed values are generally in
compliance with the value of My ;
when the plastic hinge forms in the connection, the computed values are lower
than the experimental ones. This fact suggest that some improvements in design
formulas are perhaps needed in order to have less complicate beam to columns
joints.
when the plastic hinge forms in the panel, computations underestimate the
strength of the panel even of 50%. This fact suggest that an improvement of
design formulas are necessary mainly for what EUROCOD E . 8 concerns.
198
A121
(*)
Experimental
Computed
moments
Iioments
Comments
M,
Mzs
Mp,
beam
joint
panel
(*)
Al
110.
==
420.
70.
290.
Bl
110.
==
420.
70.
290.
Cl
272.
330.
430.
330.
225.
P.c
C2
445.
500.
370.
330.
C3
440.
445.
400.
420.
330.
, c
Dl
300.
360.
340.
330.
360.
190.
D2
365.
430.
465.
370.
360.
290.
D3
410.
480.
500.
420.
360.
290.
D4
370.
420.
480.
370.
290.
290.
D5
360.
430.
460.
370.
290.
290.
D6
250.
280.
350.
330.
195.
190.
D7
210.
370.
160.
290.
weak tendons
D8
220.
370.
160.
290.
weak tendons
El
250.
295.
395.
330.
190.
b,
E2
370.
400.
285.
370.
290.
E3
380.
430.
400.
370.
290.
b,
FI
230.
280.
300.
330.
190.
b,
F2
325.
380.
335.
370.
290.
weak tendons
weak tendons
plastic hinge in the beam

plastic hinge in the connection
plastic beam in the panel
Fig. III. 1 Exterior Joints
V122
199
Experimental
Computed
moments
moments
My
(*)
Mu
MP,
beam
connection
Comments
panel
(*)
Gl
45.
620.
50.
235.
G2
55.
620.
50.
235.
Hl
150.
170.
90.
620.
145.
235.
II
260.
300.
430.
620.
160.
12
470.
540
470.
620.
235.
13
490.
600.
480.
620.
235.
14
700.
750.
650.
620.
710.
c,
15
720.
850.
620.
710.
Jl
360.
420.
590.
620.
725.
345.
J2
500.
600.
610.
620.
725.
460.
J3
520.
600.
570.
620.
725.
460.
J4
580.
620.
760.
620.
725.
970.
J5
660.
740.
840.
620.
725.
1080.
J6
700.
800.
860.
620.
725.
1080.
J7
720.
660.
560.
620.
725.
1080.
CP
Kl
320.
460.
525.
620.
615.
235.
K2
500.
620.
560.
620.
615.
330.
K3
560.
660.
830.
620.
615.
760.
K4
500.
530
530.
620.
615.
330.
LI
330.
440.
330.
620.
185.
without stiffeners
without stiffeners
without stiffeners
plastic hinge in the beam

plastic hinge in lhe connection
plastic beam in the panel
200
Fig. III.2 Interior Joints
A123
Service : Ponts & Charpentes
APPENDIX
TEST REPORT OF THE LIEGE LABORATORY
Dr. Ir. A. PLUMIER
201
REPORT ON THE C Y C L I C
ON THREE
TESTS
MADE
FULL SCALE
IN
LIEGE
FRAMES
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. Definition of the test set up.
2.
Definition of tested frame n l .
3.
Frame 1 - Test results.
k.
Observations during the test on frame 1.
5.
Relative resistance brought "by beam-column connections A, B, C.
6. Comparison of the test results on frame 1 with test results on single

connexion (Serie 1 and 2).
7. Definition of tested frame n2.
8. Frame 2 - Test results.
9. Observations during the test on frame 2.
10. Comparison of test results on frame 2 with the test results on single
connexion.
11. Further comments on the influence of the vertical loads on the cyclic behaviour
of connexions.
12. Definition of tested frame n3.
13. Frame 3. Test results.
14. Observations during the test on frame 3.
15. Relative resistance brought by beam column connections A, B, C in frame 3.
16. Computation of reference value Fdy for frames 1 and 2.
17. Processing of the test results for frames 1 arid 2 according to the ECCS
procedure.
18. Evaluation of the residual resistance of connections in frames
1 and 2.
19. Computation of reference value Fdy for frame 3.

20. Processing of the results for frame 3 according to the ECCS procedure.
21. Computation of maximum resistance value Pmax for the panel zone.
22. Computation of a better design estimate for the yield load of panel zone.
23. Synthesis of the experimental results of test serie 3 - Lige.
BO
203
1. D EFINITION OF THE TEST SET-UP.

The general dimensions of the test set-up are given at Figure 1.
Measurements on the structure are performed by means of strain gages
and displacement transducers. The positions of the strain gages are sketched at
Figure 2 and the position of the displacement tranducers at Figure 3.
The
horizontal
force
is
applied
by
means
of
two
double
stroke
hydraulic jacks +/- 1000 kN capacity, giving an overall displacement range of +

40
cm
to
- 40 cm.
These
actuators
are
only
force
controlled,
so
that
the
achievement of a displacement controlled test requires an adequate pilot to stop

displacement at the required levels.
In tested frames
2 and 3, vertical permanent loads are applied on the
beams, as sketched on Figures 17 and 18.

These loads take
their
reaction
on the horizontal spreader beam
and
consequently introduce tension forces in the upper part of the columns, between
the upper hinges and the beam to column connections.
These tension forces does not correspond to a real situation.
They can however be accepted for the following reasons.
In
connections,
yielding
frame
with
mechanism
2,
a
the
plastic
connections
bending
which
resistance
of
are
about
tested
are
20 % M
semi-rigid
beam.
will thus takes place in the column and their stress
No
state
does not influence the test.

In frame 3, the expected yielding mechanism are plastic bending moment in the
beam
and sheared
panel
mechanism
in the
column.
In that
case, the
tension
s t a t e in the column may influence the shear panel resistance, but if we look to
the figures, we find that the tension stress S in the interior column, computed
on the basis of the steel section only is :
F = 2 100 1,25 = 250 kN
3
S = 250.10 /14.910 = 16, 7 N / m m 2
The tension stress S is so low that we can consider that the columns are at a
0 stress state during the test, in Frames 2 and 3 as well as in Frame 1.
B1
205
The data acquisition is running automatically on the following basis :

- at every peak of displacement
reached, the next "target" of displacement
is
introduced
-
the
data
acquisition
is ordered
by computer
at every
1/50
of the
distance
between the previous peak and the next one

- each data acquisition requires a pair of seconds so that the t e s t needs not be
stopped since the measured values do not change substantially in such a short
period of time.
DEFINITION OF TESTED
The first
FRAME N l .
two frames
tested
in LIEGE use type connexion for
the
exterior and type connexion for the interior column. Figure 4.

The characteristics of the steel of the beams are :
yield strength : 380 N / m m 2
tensile strength : 537 N/mm 2
elongation at failure : 27 %.
The steel of the columns HE 300 is characterized as follows :
yield strength
: 404 N / m m 2
tensile strength : 489 N/mm 2

elongation at failure : 36,6 %
The
dimensions
of
the
slab
are
sketched
at
Figure
5. The slab is
reinforced by two layers of steel net 150 6 mm.

The resistance of the concrete measured on cubes of 15 cm. side are
as follows, on the day of the test on frame 1 :
encased concrete : 42 N / m m 2 (age 45 days)
slab of frame 1 : 32 N / m m 2
(age 31 days)
The high strength M 27 bolts used for the connexion are pretensioned.
The applied couple for pretensionning is 1670 m. This value comes out of
the application of E C 3 formula :
C = k . d . 0,75 . fur . As
= 0,2 27 0,75 900 459
= 1,67 . 106 mm.
206
3. FRAME 1. TEST RESULTS.

The applied load - total rotation TETA diagram is given at Figure 6.
Total rotation is computed here as :
TETA = D
13 - D
1* /D IST 1314
From this diagram, we can deduce the following experimental values :

Py +
= 100 kN
py-
= 105 kN
TETAY+ = 6,6 . 10-3
rad
TETAY- = 10 . IO" 3 rad

Pu +
= 1*5 kN
Pu"
= 170 kN
At the end of the test, TETA+ = 8,6 . I O - 2 rad

TETA- = 8,6 . IO" 2 rad
Maximum ductility
MU+ = 13
MU- =
8,6
<f. OBSERVATIONS D URING THE TEST ON FRAME 1.

The first
cracks
on the
upper
side
of
the
slab
at
the
intermediate
column are observed for a 8 mm. displacement.

These
cracks
go through
the
slab
for
10 mm.
displacement.
They
look like an effect of shear in the slab rather than bending.

The shear in this case mainly results from a geometrical effect
rather
than of the shear computed in a classical way :

indeed discontinuities between the axis lines of each beam appear, because the
center of rotation of the end a beam lies in the connection to the column and
not at
the
intersection
column
and
not
at
the
of
the
end
of
beam lies in the connection to
intersection
of
the
axis of
result is an imposed relative vertical displacement d
beams
and columns.
the
The
between the slab covering
the right end of the left beam and the left end of the right beam. Figure 16.
This results
in a
strong
shear
effect
Vg, which
brings
major
crack and a
failure in tension of the longitudinal steel reinforcement of the slab.
B3
207
This
geometrical
shear
effect
is
strong
in case
of
semi
rigid
con
nections. The situation is probably different in rigid connections, because in that

case the rotation in the connection itself is weak.
Cracks
mm.
in the
encased
displacement. C racks
in
concrete
the
of
column
concrete
are observed for a 20
surrounding
the
connexions
are
observed for the same displacement.

The test is stopped without any real failure, on the basis of a large
enough deformation
: ductility greater than 10, displacement at floor level from
+ to 130 mm., displacement at actuator level from + to 300 mm.

These values are greater than any practical value required for the
background
of design.
The
observation
of
the
structure
during
the
test
indicates
that
the
main resistance is to be found in the steel connexion : 2 plates bolted together

by means of
friction
4 pretensioned
bolts.
One basic resistance term is given by the
between the two planes. This term is the only one up to the moment
when there is a contact between the bolt and the edges of the holes. Then a
diametral pressure plus concrete crushing term is activated, to which correspond
the
increase
in
resistance.
Figure
6.
Of
course
this second
term
is
mainly
valid at the first cycle at each step of displacement. A sharp decrease of this
term
takes
place
during
the
two
further
cycles
at
the
same
step
of
displacement and almost nothing of this term remains when the new increase in
displacement is performed.
Then resistance only corresponds to friction and the
diagram is characterized by yield plateau at level P + = 44 kN and

P" = 50 kN, approximately.
This yielding
mechanism is very ductile and true failure of the plate
elements only depends on the elongation capacity of the particular steel used in
the connecting plate as well as in the beam. True failure could also be a weld
failure
as
observed
during
the
tests
on
single
connexions
at
Politecnico
di
Milano.
5.
RELATIVE RESISTANCE BROUGHT BY BEAM COLUMN CONNECTIONS A, B,

.
5.1. General principle.
The measurements at the strain gages allow us to compute the bending
moments
and C
208
realized
during
the
test a t connection A (one beam), (two beams)
(one beam) and their relative values.
B4
The data processing is as follows.

-
we
compute
the
quantities
MA,
MB,
MC
which
are
proportional
to
the
bending moment in the beams ;

MA = (EPS. - E P S , + EPS - EPS.) /
4
5
s
b
MB = (EPS 1 4 - E P S 1 3
MC = ( E P ^
EPS
23
+ E P S 1 5 - E P S 1 6 ) EI/v
+
EPS
25 -
EPS
26)
EI/V
For EI/v, we consider the value of the composite section of the HE 300 :
I = 3f.265cm Zf and
EI/v = 464.10 9 N mm.
- Total resisting moment MT :

MT = MA + MB + MC
- Relative resistance brought by each column
MRA = MA/MT
MRB = MB/MT
MRC = MC/MT
The diagrammes of MA, MB, MC, MRA, MRB, MRC are presented as
function of TETA = D
14/1500.
5.2. Results in Frame 1.

Figures 7 and 8 present M deduced from strain gage measurements,
which are similar to the global exterior diagramme of Figure 6.
Figures 68, 69, 70 present MA, MB, MC.
Figure 9 to 14 present MRA, MRB and MRC. We can observe:
- The diagrammes of MRA, MRB, MRC have an irregular shape, mainly when
the displacement reversal brings the applied force close to zero. Then some
small inequalities in values of resistances, some residual stresses in the
frame bring high changes in relative values MRA, MRB, MRC. The
diagrammes have been "cleaned" of these values which are not of great
interest, since they concern only small resistances.
B5
209
On the mean, MRB = 2MRA = 2MRC
in the small as well as in the large
displacement range.
There
is a dissymetry
highest
resistance
in
when
the
relative
resistances MRA and MRC , with the
the slab is in action (TETA for
MRA, TETA + for
MRC).
6.
COMPARISON
OF
THE
TEST
RESULTS
ON
FRAME
WITH THE
TEST
RESULTS ON SINGLE
CONNEXION (SERIE I AND 2).
If
we
apply
the
virtual
work
relation
to the
structure
sketched
at
Figure 15, we have :

P.D
4 M c u . TETA
TETA.h
3 450 mm. (3000 + 250 + 200)

250 : hinge axle support
200 : half heigth
Finally
M cu =
_M2_
HEB 400
4
If we use this relation with a mean value of P u , we find
M
cu
This result
3 5
^
2.4
=
should
(145 + 170) = 136 kN.m.
be compared
to a
mean
of
ultimate
resistances found in
Milano tests on single connexions :

Mu+ = (2 Mu type Bl + Mu type Hl)/4
we find
M+ = (2 150 + 200)/4 = 125 kNm

Mu" = (2 130 + 180)/4 = 110 kNm
If we take a mean value for + and sides, we obtain for

MILANO
117,5 kNm
LIEGE
136 kNm
These results differ
Mu
F = 136/117,5 = 1,16
by a factor F of 1,16, which is not very different of the
factor F' between yield strengthes :

MILANO
LIEGE
210
fy = 317 N / m m 2
fy = 377 N/mm2
= 377/317 = 1,19
B6
We can conclude that the simple addition plastic resisting moment of

individual
connexions
gives
a sound evaluation
of
the global resistance of
the
frame.
7. D EFINITION OF TESTED
Frame
different,
n2
FRAME N2.
is
identical
to
frame
nl.
Only
the
load
pattern
is
in the sense that permanent vertical loads are applied during the test.
Their position and value are given at Figure 17.

The
characteristics
of
the
concrete are similar to those of frame

Steel : fy = 380 N / m m 2
steel
of
the
beam
and
of
the
encased
nl.
fu = 537 N / m m 2
Encased concrete : 42 N / m m 2 45 days after

The frame n2 is tested
concreting.
105 days after concreteing between the flanges of the
sections.
The strength in compression on cubes of 15 cm. side of the concrete
of t h e slab is : 32 N / m m 2 on the day of the test on frame n2.
8. FRAME 2
- TEST RESULTS.
The applied
load
- Total rotation TETA diagram is given at
Figure
19.
From this diagram, we can deduce the following experimental values
Py + = 160 kN
Py" = 170 kN
TETAY+ = 16.IO" 3 rad
TETAY- = 16.10 - 3 rad
Pu + = 150 kN.
Pu" = 135 kN
At the end of the test TETA+ = 8.10" 2 rad
TETA- = 8.IO" 2 rad
Maximum ductility : MU = 5.
B7
211
9- OBSERVATION D URING THE TEST ON FRAME 2.

The first
cracks
on the
upper
side
of
the
slab are
observed
for
<i mm. displacement.

These cracks go through the slab for a 12 mm. displacement. Like in
frame 1, they mainly come from a geometrical
The experimental
in the test on frame
are
higher
in
frame
yielding
effect.
level appears different
of the one observed
1 : yield resistance Py as well as yield rotation TETAY

2
than
in
frame
1.
The
difference
is
however
very
dependant upon the way these p a r a m e t e r s are estimated.

The other observations a r e similar to those made for frame 1.
10. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS ON FRAME 2 WITH THE TEST RESULTS
ON SINGLE CONNEXION.
This comparison gives similar result to the comparison at paragraph 5,
since we have :
LIEGE
LIEGE
Frame 1
Frame 2
mean
Pu
mean
M c u = 138 kN.
mean
Pu
mean
M c u = 145 kNm.
This last result is different
= 157,5 kN
= 165 kN.
by a factor
F = 145/175,5 = 1,23 of the results
obtained in Milano. This result is again of the order of the factor F'
between
the yield strengthes of the steel used in Milano and LIEGE.

11. FURTHER
COMMENTS ON THE INFLUENCE OF THE VERTICAL LOAD S ON
THE CYCLIC BEHAVIOUR OF CONNEXIONS.

Some
differences
appear
between
the
test
involving
vertical
load
(Frame 2) or no vertical load (Frame 1).

a. Yield load P y and yield rotation TETAy
are
higher in Frame 2.
b. Current maximum resistance of each loop of similar displacement is

higher for Frame 2 than for Frame 1, but the difference decreases as
TETA increases - Figure 20.
212
B8
c.
At
the
end
practical
of
use
test,
which
(TETA
here
= 8. I O
-2
correspond
rad),
the
to a high enough rotation

resistance
is
finally
for
similar
for
frames 1 and 2.
d. Current loops at 3r<^ cycle of equal displacement are very similar in frames
1 and 2 - Figure 21.
e. A basic reliable elastic perfectly
design
resistance
plastic behaviour which could be used as a
of this type of connection then appears quite
independant
of the level of vertical loading on the beams - Figure 2 1 .

Pyd
(35 + 55)12 = 45 kN.
M y( j
0,863 Pyd
=
(cfr. paragraph 6).
38,8 kNm.
The origin of the difference
in behaviour between Frames
1 and 2 is
not established. It might be a result of the positioning of the bolts in the holes
of
the
connecting
plate,
which
in
Frame
might
be
forced
to
remain
in
contact with the edges of the holes.

12. DEFINITION OF TESTED FRAME N3.
Frame n3 is built with a connection design similar to type Kl or K3
of
Serie 2. A slab is concreted on the elements and vertical loads similar
to
those of Frame 2 - Figure 17 are applied.

Because of a major difference between the design yield strength of the
steel
of
N/mm 2 ),
the
it
HE 260 A beams
was
decided
(300 N/mm 2 ) and the real yield strength
to make a further
(470
width reduction of the flanges of
the beams - Figure 22 - in such a way that the real resistance of the beam
remain
equal
to
the
design
resistance
and
to comply
with
the
overstrength
condition for the connection.

The characteristics of the concrete are :
encased concrete : 42 N / m m 2
45 days after
concreting.
The frame n3 is tested 183 days after that concreting

concrete of the slab : 42 N / m m 2 on the day of the test (age 49 days).
The characteristics of the steel of the columns are :
Yield strength : 404 N / m m 2
Tensile sress : 489 N/mm2
elongation at failure : 36,6 96.
B9
213
13. FRAME 3 - TEST RESULTS.

The applied load - Total Rotation TETA diagram is given at
Figure
23.
From this diagram, we deduce the following experimental values.
Py+
550 kN.
Py+
620 kN.
TETAY+ = + 2,8.10- 2 rad

A Y- = - 2,5. IO" 2 rad
PU +
580 kN.
PU"
-680 kN.
At the end of the test
TETA+
TETAMaximum ductility
9,5.IO - 2
=
9,3.10" 2
MU+ = 3,
MU- = 3,7
1*. OBSERVATIONS D URING THE TEST ON FRAME 3.

Cracks in the slab appear for a 5 mm. displacement. T h e y , a r e bending
cracks. The failure
of
the steel
reinforcement
in the
slab is observed for a
displacement of 55 mm. in the positive direction.

The yielding zones observed during the t e s t a r e :
- plastic hinge in the beam itself
the
shear
resistance
of
the
close to the exterior column ; in this case,
panel
zone of
the column
is higher
than
the
plastic resistance of the beam in bending

- sheared panel zone in the interior column ; the value of the shear, which is
there
twice
the
value
in
the
exterior
column
is
such
that
the
plastic
resistance of the sheared panel zone is reached before the plastic bending of
the adjacent beams.
The failure takes place in the reduced sections of the beams, close to
the
exterior
beam,
on
columns
both
side
: a
of
crack
the
propagates
frame.
The bad
through
surface
the
lower
aspect
flange
of
the
corresponding
to
manual oxygen cutting without surface cleaning in the reduced section certainly
is a cause for an early crack propagation.
214
B10
15. RELATIVE RESISTANCE BROUGHT BY BEAM COLUMN-CONNECTIONS Af B, C

in FRAME 3.
The
data
processing
is
similar
to
the
one
done
deduced
from
for
frame
1 (see
paragraph 5).
Figures
measurements.
applied force
24
They
and
are
25
very
present
similar
MT
to
the
diagramm
based
the
strain
on the
gage
exterior
measurement.
Figure 71 to 73 present MA, MB, MC.

Figure 26 to 31 present MRA, MRB, MRC We make the following observations :
- in the
way
first
cycles, the shares of resistance are distributed in the
following
A - 28 % , - 46 %, C 28 %
- in the g r e a t displacement cycles, the mean shares are :

A - 30 96,
- 46 % , C - 25 %.
- the shares for great displacements are distributed in a dissymetrical way ;

for TETA +, they are
A - 25 96, - 40 %, C - 35 % ;
for TETA - they are
A - 35 %, - 55 %, C - 10 %
No simple comment can explain these figure.

The
only
direct
displacement
range,
practical
the
information
mean
share
are
we
obtain
in
that
in
close to a proportion of
the
great
resistance
equal to 1/4 for each connection :

A
: 30 96,
46 %, C
25 %
A complete explanation of the obtained values would require a complet

analysis of the results and a simulation by means of D YNACS in which MRA,
MRB, MRC would be computed.
B11
215
16. COMPUTATION OF REFERENCE VALUE Fdy FOR FRAMES 1 AND

Fdy
is
intended
to
be the
applied load to the tested

Connections
in
maximum
elastic
computed
2.
value o
the
frame.
Frames
1 and
2 being
semi-rigid,
the computation
Fdy cannot be done one the basis of a classical elastic analysis of the tested
frame
full
in
a simple
sections,
but
engineering
sections
model.
are
This model
uncomplete
would
assume
stiffness
of
in the more stressed zones of
the
and
structure, the ends of the beams.

Our
refers
to
analysis
values
must
then
computed
in
be
based
on these
the
SRCS
research
uncomplete
document
sections
"D raft
on
the
bending moment transmission of AF/AS connections for test series I - February

1988
By PLUMIER
THUNUS" and
similar
document
for
test
series 2 -
January 1989.
In that
with
document,
corresponding
we find
maximum
elastic
the
possibilities
design
values
for
of
mechanical
force
in
behaviour,
the
bolted
connection.
We can deduce the equivalent values in frames
1 and 2 by proportion
in yield strength (380/355).

The lower
cannot
value
of
corresponds to the maximum elastic event. It
however be t h e ovalization of holes, because this event can only take
place after
sliding appears between the two plates, that event should not take
place in the first cycles and should not be considered as the basis of Fdy.
The next event is the yielding of the strap in tension, which will be
considered as the basis to Fdy.
To compute
Fdy, we use the same approach as in paragraph 6, which
is supported by the results given in paragraph 15, at least in the plastic range
: Fdy = f Mu/3,45.
Mu is computed on the basis of internal forces in the section including
an active slab.
216
B12
Ft(kN)
Mechanical
Ft frame
1.2 (kN)
Mu (kNm)
Fdy (kN)
Yielding of strap in tension
482
515
100
Sliding of plate
660
706
Yielding of bolts in shear
932
997
284
304
116
Ovalization of holes in the

beam
67
Figures 32 and 33 presents the load displacement curves for frames 1 and 2
with the experimental and computed values of Fdy and the corresponding
values of Vy and Vdy.
17. PROCESSING OF THE TEST RESULTS FOR FRAMES 1 AND
2 ACCORD ING
TO THE ECCS PROCED URE.

The processing is made considering both the experimental and
computed values of the yield load.
The values taken into account are as follows.
Frame 1.
F , = 116 kN
dy
TETA
= 100 kN
TETA
= - 105 kN
TETA
y+exp
yd
y+
= 6,5.10
_3
(deduced from linear

behaviour on the
diagramme)
= 6,6.IO"3
= 10.10
y-
y-exp
These values are very close together. Processing is done with one single value
F = 116 kN
TETA
= 6,6.10
TETA
_3
. = 6,5.10" 3 .
yd
(without failure),
Frame 2.
F . - 116 kN
dy
TETA
TETA
= 160 kN
y+exp
B13
, = 7,5.10
(deduced from linear

behaviour on the
diagramme)
16.10"
y+
= - 190 kN
y-exp
TETA
= 16.10"
y-
217
The results of the analysis are shown at Figures 34, 35 and 36.
The function epsilon is the ratio of current maximum applied load to the
yield load . It is given on the positive and negative direction of the
displacement, as a function of the ductility my in those directions.
The function eta gives the ratio of the energy absorbed in one cycle
to the energy of one perfect elasto plastic cycle defined by , TETA
and the
same level of ductility. It is given as a function of the global ductility m,

including positive and negative side of the diagramme.
The function
etatot gives the cumulated absorbed energy ratio of all
the previous cycles to the one of ductility m.
18.
EVALUATION OF THE
FRAMES 1 AND 2.
RESID UAL
RESISTANCE
OF
CONNECTIONS
IN
It has been mentioned in paragraphs 4, 9 and 11 that a basic reliable

plastic behaviour appears during the cycles.
This value can be computed.
Along the cycles, the concrete of the slab is progressively pushed
away, except in a restructed zone between the flange of the beam and the
flange of the column where in can be considered as well confined. There the
concrete can reach a resistance far higher than 30 N/mm^ so that the arm of
internal forces can be taken as half the height of the beam (130 mm) - Figure
39. The tension force from the bolted connection is, at these stage of great
displacements, restricted to the yielding resistance of the bearings.
We have :
F
M
(bearing, 4 bolts) = 2 Ffa

u
130.338
Corresponding
+ 2 F fa2 = 2 (71 + 98) = 338 kN.
43,9 k N m .
'
is
Pu =
43,9
51 kNm.
3,48
As can be seen on Figures 37 and 38, this value fits well with the
experimental
record
and
give
fair
evaluation
of
stable
plastic
mechanism taking place in this kind of connection.
218
B14
Of course, when the displacement is increased in a way such that

the
slab
comes
again
in contact
with
the
flange of the column, the arm of
internal forces increases, as well as the resistance. But the resistance drop at a
second
cycle
of
same
displacement
is important, because the concrete of
the
slab is in a very cracked s t a t e .

19. COMPUTATION OF REFERENCE VALUE Fdy FOR FRAME 3.
From
the
design
of
the structure,
we know that
the
weak point in
which the first yielding will appear is the panel zone of the interior column.
The forces applied to the panel zone are computed in a simple way as
indicated in Figure 39. Given the relative rigidities of the interior and exterior
columns, the interior column carries a Fdy/2 shear force. We derive M at the
end of the beams and the shear in the panel zone :
M = Fdy.h/4
= 2M/h
Fdy = 2 h .T/h
The shear resistance of the panel zone based on EC 3 is :
= f . t . h T
l/
y w
c
The shear resistance brought by the concrete can be computed as follows.

Figure 39.
compressed strut strength : D
= 2 A'
. f .
A'
= strut section (one side) = t W

c
c
W = strut width = 1/2 strut length
= D
cos ALFA
concrete
The numerical data are as follows :
tw
= 11 m
= 404 N / m m 2
(column)
B15
219
h
h
h
f
260 m m .
410 m m .
3450 m m .
16 N/mm2
cd
We f i n d
A'
33950 mm2
1086 kN
Cos A L F A
0,535
= 581 kN
concrete
F_,
= 2.410.581/3450 = 138 kN
dy c o n c r e t e
, = 400.11.260/ 3 = 660 kN
steel
F,
. = 2.410.660/3450 = 157 kN
dy steel
F J = 138 + 157 = 294 kN
dy
F , = 294 kN is the reference value for limit of the
dy
elastic stage
Figure
40
presents
the
load
displacement
curve
for frame
3 with the experi
mental and computed values of F . .

Computing the corresponding value of the bending moment at the end
of the beams, we confirm t h a t the panel zone is the first yielding zone.
M . . u
end of beam
F . . h/4 = 294.3,45/4 = 253 kN.m

dy
M +
composite with slab and width reduction = 430 kNm
id = 280 kNm
M id, mean value = 355 kN.m > 253 kNm
220
B16
20. PROCESSING OF THE RESULTS FOR FRAME 3 ACCORDING TO THE ECCS

PROCEDURE.
The processing is made considering both the experimental and computed
values of the yield load. The values are as follows :
. (mean value) = l.lO" 2
yd
TETA
= 2,5.10_2rad
ldU
y+
F.,
= 294 kN
dy
= 550 kN
y+exp
P
vyexp
exp
62
TETA
k N
TETA
'510"2
rad
The results of the analysis are shown at Figures 41 and 42.

21. COMPUTATION OF MAXIMUM RESISTANCE VALUE Pmax FOR THE PANEL
ZONE.
In the approach of paragraph 19, three factors contributing to the resis
tance of the panel zone are not considered because they involve larger yielding
than those of the first yield estimated there :
panel zone resistance would be better approached by
Then
s
T
. t
. h,
c
= 1 1 4 3 kN
the ultimate resistance brought by the concrete is better approached by

fu = 30 N/mm 2
T
= 1089 kN
a term of plastic moment of the flanges of the column exists with a c o r r e s

ponding t f shear value :
T
= 1,9 t 2
fe
. W. . f /h
fe
y
= 1,9 . 19 2 . 300 . 400/410 = 201 kN
Then, the estimate for
would be :
max
T
mav
= 1143 + 1089 + 201 = 2433 kN.

= 2.410.2433/3450 = 578 kN
max
This estimation fits well with the experimental value Figure 43.
B17
221
22. COMPUTATION OF A BETTER D ESIGN ESTIMATE FOR THE YIELD
LOAD
OF
PANEL ZONE.
Using the same terms as in the approach o paragraph 19, but with an
estimate of the panel shear resistance equal to
T
y " lw " hc
^like
in
ParagraPn
21
We approach the yield load of the panel zone by
dy*
1143 + 581 = 1724 kN

= 2.410.1724/3450 = 409 kN.
This estimate also fits well with the experimental value. Figure 42.
23. SYNTHESIS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF TEST SERIE 3 - LIEGE.
In order to compare the experimental results, we give the following

quantities in the next table
M
Elastic limit of the bending moment
TETA
Total rotation corresponding to M
M2 . 5
2.5
Bending Moment (KN m) corresponding to a total rotation

TETA = 2.5 %
TETA
u
M
Maximum Total Rotation reached during the test and allowing t h r e e

complete cycles without failure
Bending moment corresponding to TETA
TETA /TETA
u
Conventional maximum ductility ratio
TETA / 2 . 5 D uctility margin in respect to the limit of 2.5 % rotation assumed

by many researchers as the maximum value of storey drift
allowable
during a severe seismic event.

The experimental
values given
in the following
Table are mean
value
of the ones obtained in the positive and negative directions of the displacement.
222
B18
M
y
TETA
y
M
2.5%
M
u
KNm
Frame 1 - Experim.
TETA
TETA
88
0,83
135
150
Frame 1 - Design
100
0,65
Frame 2 - Experim.
142
1,60
175
162
Frame 2 - Design
100
0,65
Frame 3 ~ Experim.
585
2,5
560
630
*,7
Frame 3 ~ Design
253
1,00
B19
> 6,6
> 6,6
TETA
TETA
u
2.5%
y
> 8
> 10
> 3,2
-
> 4,1
> 2,64
> 10
1,88
4,7
1,88
-
223
ro
ro
f
" ^
H1
VJL
Ki*.
^^tev&iglft&y
Ing. Resp.
UNIVERSITE DE LIEGE
Service "PONTS & CHARPENTES"
RECHERCHE ARBEDCECA SUR LA RESISTANCE
SISMIQUE DES STRUCTURES MIXTES
A. PLUMIER
B. THUNUS
m
ro
o
Figure 1
-*
CD
ro
D+.6+
-*
> :
3 Ili
A
/
f /.
/-
///e
f
'
1500
^L
1
1500
- <
/
.
15 Wy 16
9
L
1500
_/
20
1500
/
25/
//25
8
!>!
y
ro
ro
en
Strain gages
Figure 2
P+
^
ro
ro
D+.e+
*-P
o
o
to
f_,120 0 I /O 12A0
(D
ro
Displacement transducers
Figure 3
Exterior columns Aand C
M 27
150
US
70
135
Interior columns
Figure 4
B23
227
o
CM
I
I
O
CM
- 4 "
\ 7 / / / / / ; / / / \
CM
1m
.r..JK..
ss
w / / / rs
HE 260A
ytr^-t-
HE 300B
==-
Figure 5
228
B24
co
ro
ui
100
d (floor level, mm)
(10" rad)
ro
ro
to
Figure 6 : Load displacement curve of frame 1
Frame 1
Cycles 1 to U
(10 rad
_1
-10
10
Figure 7
230
B26
M-
Frame 1
Cycles U to end of test
Figure 8
B27
231
MRA
Frame 1
Cycles 1 to U
(10"rad)
-10
-5
10
-0.5
-1
Figure 9
232
B28
MRB
- J
-10
Frame 1
Cycles 1 to U
- I
-5
(10 rad!
'
-Q5
-1
Figure 10
B29
233
10
MRC
Frame 1
Cycles 1 to U
MO rad)
-10
-5
10
0,5
-1
Figure 11
234
B30
MRA
Frame 1
Cycles 4 to end of test
-0,5
-1
Figure 12
B31
235
MRB
Frame 1
-0,5
_1
Figure 13
236
B32
MRC
Frame 1
Cycles k to end of test
-0.5
-1
Figure %
B33
237
NS
oo
-
Meu
Meu/ Meu
co
Figure 15
Y':n^:-:b^^n^^^:ô.O^CS.
>ttQMKU.&mmsi
d v = Q.d
Figure 16
B35
239
to
-
3250
Figure 17 : Vertical loads applied in test on frame 2 and 3
CD
w
>
1150
Upper spreadear beam
I
l
15
Welded plate
~3^
o
o
LD
200kN
Hydraulic jack
15mm
}1^Q'
! ' ' '
Bolted plate
Slab
Figure 18 : Practical way to apply vertical loads
B37
241
D
Q)
OJ
3
OJ
>
7L
.S
\-/
P-
E
OJ
l_l
3
CL
TD
ro
o
OJ
c
en
242
B38
CD
(O
Frame 1
Frame 2
(10 rad)
Figure 20 : E nvelope curves of maxima in P- loops for frame 1 and 2
ro
t*
Frame 1
Frame 2
=^rrr_
//
Pyd = 35kN
Pyd = 55kN
co
u
o
-9
-8
-7
-6
-5
-k
-3
-2
-1
rd
Figure 21 : 3
10
-2
loop a t 6,5.10
rad f o r f r a m e s 1 and 2
Concreted before erection
Concrete on site
(slat + panel zone)
300
40(501
200
uv
100,
4 bolts M 30
Figure 22 : Detailing of the connection zone of frame 3
B41
245
ro
PCkM)
-Pt
O)
dCfloor leuel) mm
CD
ik
ro
Frame 3
rad)
10
-5
-10
Figure 2U
B43
247
Frame 3
Figure 25
248
B44
MRA
Frame 3
Cycles 1 to
HO rad]
*
-10
-5
10
-Q5
-1
Figure 26
45
249
MRB
1
Frame 3
Cycles 1 to A
d rad I
10
'
'
10
Q5
Figure 27
250
B46
MRC
Frame 3
Cycles 1 to U
HO"rad)
-10
-5
10
0,5
-1
Figure 28
B47
251
MRA
Frame 3
0,5
-1
Figure 29
252
B48
MRB
Frame 3
Cycles 4 to end of test
-0,5
-1
Figure 30
B49
253
MRC
Frame 3
-0.5
-1
Figure 31
254
B50
00
nP(kN)
Ui
200
DESIGN - EXPERIM.
d (floor level, mm]
-^dCfrad)
IV3
CTI
UI
Figure 32: Load displacement curve of frame 1
ro
EXPERIM. Py
DESIGN. Fdy
dCfloor
160
ico
9l10_2rad)
^-
-10
CO
ui
ro
10
leuel)
mm
FRflflE I
Ref= design âlue = exp value
CD
(D
J
O
, V
(S
10
15
20
25
my +
o
(0
-.
ro
ui
10
Figure 34
15
my
20
25
10
15
20
25
FRfdE I I
Ref= d e s i g n
.alue
ro
Ol
co
\AM
co
10
15
20
25
my +
co
^->
()
00
(
10
my
Figure 35
15
20
25
FRfllE I I
Ref= exper.
.alue
co
(O
Figure 36
my -
|P(kN)
IO
05
O
200
150
Computed residual
resistance
(floor level, mm)
150
m
in
>
4l
l
h
3 2 1
200
1
*
3
^dO'radJ
P(UM)
CD
Ui
-J
Computed residual
resistance
cKfloor
l e o e l ) mm
M-
M=1/2(M+ + M-)
crushed
concrete
Figure 39
262
B58
PCkN)
CD
ui
eoo
000
EXPERIM.
DESIGN
Fdy
600
dCfloor leuel) mm
DESIGN
EXPERIM
(10"2rad )
ro
FRAME III
Ref= exper. ualue
ro
co
0)
my
o
ti
CO
O)
FRflHE I I I
Ref= des gr. v a l u e
co
CD
^>
CO
co
CD
10
15
m
o
(0
+>
CD
to
to
en
en
Figure U2
my
20
25
PCkM)
ro
co
co
Computed maximum
resistance Fmax
Computed better
approach Fdy *
dCfloor
1G0
Fmax
(10 rad )
>
ro
1ttFigure 43 : Load displacement curve of frame 3
r-iis
l e * j e l ) mm
G . C . L I E G E a.s.b.i.
LABORATOIRES D'ESSAIS DES CONSTRUCTIONS DU GENIE CIVIL
ET D'HYDRAULIQUE FLUVIALE DE L'UNIVERSITE DE LIEGE a.s.b.l.
Procs-verbal n
de l'essai n
Planche
Figure 44 - Frame 1 - Overall view of t e s t s e t - u p
B63
267
Procsverbal n
de l'essai n
Planche
01
Ol
_C
XJ
C
O
eu
01
V)
c_
ai
ai
ru
ai
ai
_c
'>%
c
Q.
e
ro
LD
268
B64
Procsverbal n
de l'essai n
Planche
ro
C/)
c
Ol
>
Ol
c_
T3
ro
o
'
c_
Ol
*
M
ro
<
Ol
t
Ol
c
E
3
c_
!_/
11
1_P
T3
C
ro
ro
c
Ol
ro
ro
.o
Ol
e
C
L
l_l
QJ C
CTI Ol
C Ol
ST
>
11
+
Ol
ro ro.
Q_ 1 3
ro
c
u_
vO
d
Ol
c_
3
u_
B65
269
LABORATOIRES O'ESSAIS DES CONSTRUCTIONS DU GENIE CIVIL
Procsverbal n
de l'essai n
Planche
Figure 47 Frame 3 Column Shear the slab and concrete

Crushing on the column flange
270
B66
Procs-verbal n
de l'essai n
Planche
CD
o
i
ro
e
c
o
<<O)
c
o
Ol
C
)
Q-
e
ra
co
O
C_
en
B67
271
MA -MB ^ c
--7,5.10 8
'Nxmm)
FRAME 1
Bending moments in Connections
derived from strain measurement
1 s t Cycle at =4,5.10" 2
-15
MA
MB
MC
__2,5
272
B68
A .M .MC (Nxmm)
7,5.10 8
FRAME 1
derived from strain measuremrTF
2 n d Cycle at =4.5.10"2
MA
MB
MC
2,5
(rad)
5.10"
B69
273
,M
--7.5.10 8
,M
(Nxmm)
FRAME 1
3 r d Cycle at =4.5.10"2
MA
MB
--5
MC
--2.5
' ' ' '2. "
274
'
(rad)
,-2
5.10
B70
MA .MB .MC (Nxrnm)
--7.5.108
FRAME
1 s t Cycle at =4,5.1(2
MA
MB
MC
B71
275
,M Mc (Nxmm)
--7,5.10 s
--5.10
FRAME
2>nd
Cycle at 6=4.5.10MA
MB
MC
276
B72
MA ,MB ,MC (Nxmm)
ments in Connections
m strain measurement
3 r d Cycle at =4.5.1( 2
MA
MB
B73
277
PROF. DR.-ING. WOLFRAM KLINGSCH

Baustofftechnologie und Brandschutz
Baustoffprfstelle
Forschungszentrum fr Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau
BERGISCHE UNIVERSITT
WUPPERTAL
APPENDIX C:
TEST REPORT OF THE WUPPERTAL LABORATORY
SEISMIC RESISTANCE OF COMPOSITE STRUCTURES

S . R . C . S .
Prof. Dr.-Ing. W. Klingsch

Dipl.-Ing. B. Knig
Dipl.-Ing. W. Weber
July 1991
Postanschrift Pauluskirchstr 7 (Laborgebude), 5600 Wuppertal 2

(0202) 439-31 28
Telefon
8 592 262 ghw
Telex
(0202) 8 2560
Telefax
279
APPENDIX C;
TEST REPORT OF THE WUPPERTAL
LABORATORY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
C2
1.
2.
TEST BODIES
2.1
2.2
STEEL
3.
TESTING INSTALLATION
4.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
5.
TEST RESULTS
5.1
JOINT TYPE 13
5.2
JOINT TYPE H I
5.3
JOINT TYPE Gl
5.4
JOINT TYPE
ANALYSIS
MATERIALS
CONCRETE
281
1.
TEST BODIES
All steel components (beams, columns, bolts, weldings) of the

frames were prefabricated by a ARBED-subcontractor in Luxembourg
and shipped to Wuppertal.
At Wuppertal institute reinforcement was built in and the single
members were concreted. Connecting to frames was made by high
tension bolts and - depending on the different connecting types by additional welding of the beam flanges to the column flange or
by anchoring of the reinforcement to the column.
C3
283
2.
MATERIALS
2.1,
STEEL
2.1.1 Beams and Columns

The ARBED quality control services had indicated the following
properties on ingot for the steel used in the specimen:
Beam HE 260 A
Column HE 300 B
N/mm2
N/mm2
fy =
fu =
269
415
u =
35,1 %
fy =
fu =
u =
266 N/mm2
413 N/mm2
36,3 %
One sample was taken and tested in the University laboratory:

Column HE 300
fy =
fu =
u =
280 N/mm2
3 90 N/mm2
25,7 %
2.1.2 Reinforcement
Bars of f 20 mm gave the following results:
fy =
fu =
u =
284
591 N/mm2
662 N/mm2
14,6 %
C4
2.2
CONCRETE
Concrete resistance was measured on 150 mm cubes according to

aging conditions of DIN 1048:
Specimen
13
Gl
HI
Strength
N/mm2
Variation
%
37
34
37
36
4.8
33
35
36
35
4.4
30
29
31
30
3.3
30
31
31
31
1.9
33
8.8
Total Mean Value
C5
Mean Value
N/mm2
285
3.
TESTING INSTALLATION
Four frames were tested in Wuppertal. They can be divided into

two frames with strong joints (13 and K) and
two frames with weak joints (HI and Gl).
The specimen were designed to simulate a section of a multistorey
composite frame (figure 1 ) . The columns were hinged at both ends.
The four tests were loaded vertically on the beams with 2 * 100
kN.
Figures 1 - 3
show the testing installation with the counterframe
and the hydraulic jack.
286
C6
Figure 1: Testing Installation

w [mm]
F [ k N ]
C7
287
PROF. DR.-ING. W. KLINGSCH
Figure 2 and 3: Testing I n s t a l l a t i o n
288
C8
4.
QUALITY
ASSURANCE
The first three tests failed early in the elastic range, due to
unsatisfying welding quality of the subcontractor. Poor welding
quality of the joints could not be recognized by visual control.
Detailed
analysis
after welding
failure showed
some heavy
mistakes.
Therefore,
the
following
requirements
should
be
fulfilled for each welded construction for seismic design:
Failures of welding
workmanship.
It
is
important
to
constructions
choose
the
occur by bad design
and poor
right
avoid
material,
to
an
accumulation of weldings, to make sure that all weldings are good

accessible.
It is necessary to use the right welding electrodes and electrode
diameters and to prepare the steel surface.
In order to avoid
singular stresses in the
necessary to preheat thick structural components.
welding,
it
is
Butt welds are better than fillet welds under dynamic loads.
The welders have to be
welding qualification.
highly
qualified,
they
have
to
get
Non-destructive methods for determining invisible defects of

weldings like the ultrasonic testing and the radio materiology are
necessary to avoid failures which happened in the first three
tests.
As the specimen were fabricated in another workshop then those of
Milan, Liege and Darmstadt,
the results obtained
are not
comparable from the point of view of the weld reliability,
C9
289
5.
TEST RESULTS
5.1
JOINT TYPE 13
The first frame test was designed with joint type 13 (figure 4 ) .
Welding of the flanges failed within the elastic field at both
joints (figure 5 ) . At one side the welding of connecting plate to
column flange failed immediately (figure 6 ) . Analysis of the other
joint after test showed also failure by pressure of the bolts on
the face of the holes in the connecting plate. The holes of the
other web plate were largely ovalized in the horizontal direction,
which means no significant influence of shear forces.
Figure 7 - 7b show the load-deformation behaviour of test 13.
290
C10
DETAIL
13'
*1
H
NO CONNCT\ON OF T H E L f t B
M
(D
3&7
4*
^2fiKZ\l
///// /?// /// szzt
s. S
o
D
D
(D
^<
t)
\///////7r//////>/\
H E 2bo A
ro
to
Figure 5 and 6 : Connection type 13"
292
C12
TEST SPECIMEN "13
" I / " " '
co
tu
>3
(D
ri
co
(D
3
fD
3
j
f
2
J
ro
co
co
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
TOTAL ROTATION [rad]
0.02
0.04
0.06
TEST SPECIMEN "13"
IO
(O
Pk
iQ
C
H
)
300
en
r
en
ro
200
3
ro
100
Ld
OL
O
LL
100
200
300
o
300
100
100
DISPLACEMENT [mm]
300
Figure 7b: Test Specimen "13"
Welding of the lower flange failed within the elastic field at

both joints. At one side the welding of connecting plate to column
flange failed immediately.
1
Failure of the welding of the lower flange.
Failure of the welding of connecting plate to column flange.
TEST SPECIMEN "13"

300
200 -
100 -
-100
-200
-300 -{
-300
-100
100
300
displacement [rr.m]
C15
295
5.2
JOINT TYPE HI
The second frame test was designed with joint type HI (figure 8 ) .
The welding
of the web plate
to the column flange failed early
(figures 9 and 10). The connection of slab reinforcement bars (two

rebars o 16 mm) to the columns did not fail.
Figure 11 - lib show the load-deformation curve of test HI.
296
C16
o
k,
DETAIL
H1
CO(NNECT\ON
OF
THE
StAB
*1
C
h
)
co
o
3
D
)
rt
><
ro
)
CO
J
F i g u r e 9 and 1 0 : Connection Type Hl"
298
C18
TEST SPECIMEN "HI"
H-
M
)
500
400
co
300
CB
O
g
(D
200
ne
100
LU
O
2
100
200
300
400
500
IO
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
CO
co
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
TEST SPECIMEN
"HIM "
o
o
C
h
(0
300
13
CD
en
ri
200
en
)
O
100
LI
O
Lu
100
200
300
ro
300
100
100
DISPLACEMENT [mm]
300
Figure lib: Test Specimen "HI"
The welding of the web plate to column flange failed early. The
slab was linked to the columns by two rebars.
Failure of web plate to the column welding cannot be recognized in
the diagram.
1
The curve shows the slip between rebars and concrete and the
elastic/plastic behaviour of the rebars.
TEST SPECIMEN " H 1 "

300
200 -
1
V
100 -
-100 -
-200
-300
-3C0
-100
100
300
displacement [ m m ]
C21
301
5.3
JOINT TYPE Gl
The third frame test was designed with joint type Gl (figure 12).
The pins failed after
was
linked
connection
to
did
the
not
first cycle (figures 13 and 14). The slab

columns
fail
by
two
rebars.
This
and explains the residual
additional
load bearing
capacity.
Figure 15 - 15b show the load-deformation behaviour of test Gl.
Figure
16-26
show
the
functions
according
to
the
ECCS-
Recommandations 45.
302
C22
DETAIL
l o C ONHJE
C T\OM' O P THE SUAS
C
)
H
o
3
(D
rt
O
rt
<
)
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
:=!^^4
F i g u r e 13 a n d 1 4 : C o n n e c t i o n t y p e
Gl"
*A
304
C24
TEST SPECIMEN "G1
o
to
ui
0)
Ui
)
)
TD
(D
O
3
fl)
D
\-
Ld
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.06
TEST SPECIMEN "G1"
h1
300
en
fu
13
CD
200
en
rt
en
(D
100
OL
o
li.
100
200
300
o
ro
>
300
100
100
DISPLACEMENT [mm]
300
Figure 15b: Test Specimen "G'
The pins failed after first cycle. The slab was linked to the
column by two rebars.
The failure of the pins cannot be recognized in the diagram.
1
The curve shows the slip between rebars and concrete and the
elastic/plastic behaviour of the rebars.
The curve shows the friction resistance of the frame.
TEST SPECIMEN " G 1 "

300
200 -
100 -
-100 -
-200
-300
-300
-100
100
300
C27
307
Figure 16: Test Specimen "Gl"-Definition of F
DEFINITION OF Fy
There are different definitions of the limit of the elastic range

Fy. Because of the low load bearing capacity of the joint, in this
case the following definition was applied:
Definition
Definition by ECCS
d]
308
C28
TEST SPECIMEN "G1
ro
o
Full Ductility +
h"
lu
C
h
(T)
13
ro
t/)
ri
cri
)
en
Q.
rt
ft
o
(O
My +
TEST SPECIMEN "G1"
Full Ductility -
i-i
)
00
rt
en
(
0)
D
C
(t
My-
TEST SPECIMEN "G1"
Relative Resistance +
C
h
(D
H
VD
)
en
ri
en
(D
>
C
j3
'c
)
h'
(D
rt
Q.
LU
<
)
W
)
(/)
ri
fu
D
o
CD
My +
TEST SPECIMEN "G1
ro
Relative Resistance -
vT)
C
h
ro
o
H3
ro
rt
en
ro
c
0)
co
ld
DJ
rt
<
(
-
en
rt
cu
ro
o
CO
to
My-
TEST SPECIMEN "Gl"
o
w
Relative Rigidity +
en
rt
en
ro
o
3
)
3
+
(
0J
<
My +
TEST SPECIMEN "Gl
Relative Rigidity
C
M
(D
M
D
01
rt
3
)
3
ro
0)
M
OJ
rt
<
(D
S3
rt
ik
My
TEST SPECIMEN "G1"
w
ui
Relative Absorbed Energy +
)
LO
>3
en
+
)
0)
rt
<
(D
>
Di
D
(D
iQ
en
8
My +
10
co
TEST SPECIMEN "G1"

Relative Absorbed Energy
M
fD
M
13
fD
rt
en
(D
O
3
fD
3
CD
fD
M
OJ
rt
H
<
fD
>
O
<
fD
&
M
fD
I
iQ
>
My
TEST SPECIMEN "GT
Resistance Drop +
c
h
t
M
UI
13
)
[
et
en
3
>
3
C
O
en
'm
a.
J
cu
(0
My +
TEST SPECIMEN "G1"
Tl
Resistance Drop -
H
(D
c
M
1-3
en
rt
en
ro
Ti
3
)
3
id
'55
(
[
Q.
rt
DJ
no
o
Gl
My-
5.4
JOINT TYPE
The fourth frame test was designed with joint type (figure 27).
This joint design was strong. By its rigidity the maximum load of
the hydraulic jack was reached about within the elastic region.
After
reaching
the
210
mm
- displacement
the
test
had
to be
stopped because of the limited capacity of the hydraulic jack.

After this point, the test was continued in a shake down procedure
with constant displacements until load decreasing. After that
point, displacements increased. Failure occurs by punching out of
bolts. Shear panel of the column and upper and lower flange of the
beam showed extensive plastifications and cracks (figures 28-30).
Figure 31 - 31b show the load-deformation curve of test K.
Figure
32-42
show
Recommandations 45.
C39
the
functions
according
to
the
ECCS-
319
DETAIL
IQ
h
NO
CONNfcCnOhJ
OF THE, S U A S
^1
o
D
D
0)
O
rt
O
3
ri
><
2oxsW
/?'C
I / / / / / / / > / / / / / / J
<>3/l
VI 3 (JtOP)
J5S7pJ5o f 5
--
5aJ
2.00
3oo
F i g u r e 28 and 2 9 : C o n n e c t i o n t y p e
C41
"K"
321
F i g u r e 3 0 : Connection t y p e ""
322
C42
TEST SPECIMEN ""
o
f
w
500
ui
(D
(
r+
0)
)
D
UJ
ro
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.06
TEST SPECIMEN ""
ro
d
)
300
ui
0)
13
ro
200
en
ci
en
Ti
)
3
0)
3
100
lij
iL
100
200
300
o
u
300
100
100
DISPLACEMENT [mm]
300
Figure 31b: Test Specimen MK'
Failure occures by punching out of bolts. Shear panel of the

column and upper and lower flange of the beam showed extensive
plastifications and cracks.
1
Fracture in the flange after the shake down procedure.
TEST SPE CIME N " K "

300
200
100 -
-100
-200
-300
-300
-100
100
300
C45
325
Figure 32: Test Specimen "K"-Definition of F
DEFINITION OF Fy
There are different definitions of the limit of the elastic range

Fy. Because
of
the
low capacity
of the hydraulic jack, in this
case the following definition was applied:
Definition
Definition by ECCS
d]
326
C46
o
k
TEST SPECIMEN "K"
H
iQ
Full Ductility +
H
)
LO
UI
(0
UI
r
en
)
fl)
fD
3
Q.
D
C
rt
ro
vi
My +
TEST SPECIMEN ""
ro
Full Ductility -
va
0
h
.
1-3
(t)
en
rtcn
73
)
3
t
3
^
C
co
o.
rt
o
co
My-
o
k
TEST SPECIMEN ""
OJ
UI
13
ro
rt
en
ro
13
3
ro
ro
t1
OJ
'm
.
LI
r+
H
<
ro
ro
en
ri
fu
3
O
ro
ro
(O
My +
" I X
TEST SPECIMEN "

Relative Resistance
H
tQ
C
H
)
OJ
13
ro
r
en
TD
fD
3
>
D
j3
'55
ft
<
()
rt
)
3
o
ui
o
My
fl
TEST SPECIMEN ""
Relative Rigidity +
ui
C
H
CD
OJ
3
D
li
en
)
()
ro
ro
DJ
ft
*>
<
rt
My +
TEST SPECIMEN ""
H
iQ
C
Relative Rigidity -
ro
co
>3
)
rt
en
to
o
0)
3
W
)
0)
rt
"
ro
0)
<
rt
ro
My
ui
o
TEST SPECIMEN ""
0)
ui
io
13
(C
en
ti
en
fD
3
CD
3
)
h1
PJ
rf
H
ro
**
UJ
<
(D
>
o
M
D"
>
&
M
D
)
My +
TEST SPECIMEN ""

()
.**
O
)
Cf)
rt
Ui
<
(0
O
3
fD
3
50
CD
ro
LU
M
CU
rt
<
fD
>
cr
3
CD
o
My
TEST SPECIMEN ""
o
ui
Resistance Drop +
H
C
13
fi)
rt
en
"CD
(D
3
50
(0
C/l
o
'M
rt
0)
o
>
My +
TEST SPECIMEN ""

Resistance Drop
>
M
9
ro
ri
co
)
3
tl)
to
en
rt
0)
'55
LI
o
ro
D
ii
UI
O)
My
6.
ANALYSIS
Results of test 4 were be processed according to the ECCSRecomraandations 45 "Recommended Testing Procedure for Assessing
the Behaviour of Structural Steel Elements under Cyclic Loads".
In accordance with the defined evaluation procedure the tests were
considered until the displacements allow three complete cycles
with a resistance not less than 60% of the maximum resistance
obtained during the test.
For that reason and because of the early failure in the elastic
range tests 1 - 3 were declared as misfitted.
Nevertheless, test 3 was processed.
Test 4 proves that it is not sufficient to investigate the
behaviour of the joints under cyclic loads only with respect to
increasing displacements. It is also important to examine the
behaviour of joints under cyclic displacements with constant
maximum amplitudes, in order to estimate the pulsating fatigue
limit of strength.
C57
337
TECHNISCHE HOCHSCHULE
DARMSTADT
Institut fr Stahlbau und Werkstoffmechanik
C.E.C.-PROJECT NO. 7210-SA/506

SEISMIC RESISTANCE OF COMPOSITE STRUCTURES S.R.C.S.
TEST SERIES 3 - FINAL REPORT
by
J.G. Bouwkamp
B. Schneider
R.Kanz
Darmstadt May 1991
339
Table of Contents
D.I. Introduction
D.2.Test Specimen
D.2.1.Moment Resistant Frame 1
D.2.2.Moment Resistant Frame 2
D.2.3.Eccentrically Braced Frame (EBF)
D.2.4,Subassemblages
D.3.Test Setup
D.4.Material Properties
D.5, Instrumentation
D. 5.1. General
D.5.2 .Moment Resistant Frames
D.5.2.1.Global Measurements
D.5.2.2.Local Measurements
D.5.3,Eccentrically Braced Frame
D.5.3.1.Global Measurements
D.5.3.2.Local Measurements
D. 5.4 .Subassemblages
D.6.Data Acquisition System and Testing Procedure
D.6.1.Data Acquisition
D.6.2 .Test Procedure
D.6.2.1 General
D.6.2.2.Displacement Sequence
D.6.2.2.1/Frames 1 and 2
D.6.2.2.2.Frame 3
D.6.2.2.3/Subassemblages
D.7,Test Performance
D. 7.11 Test Behaviour
D.7.1.1.Behaviour of M R F test frames 1 and 2
D.7.1.2,Behaviour of EBF test frame 3
D.7.1.3 Behaviour of Subassemblages
343
343
344
344
344
345
345
345
346
346
346
346
346
347
347
347
347
348
348
348
348
349
349
350
350
350
351
351
352
352
341
Table of Contents
D.8 Test Results
D.8.1. General
D.8.2 Test Results Frame 1
D.8.5 Test Results Subassemblages
D.8.5.1 Test Results Subassemblage 1
D.8.6 Interpretated Test Results,following ECCS Recommendation No. 45
D.8.7 Synthesis of the Experimental Results
Tables
Figures
342
353
353
354
355
355
357
357
357
358
358
358
359
359
361
364
D . l Introduction
This report covers the full scale studies of two steel concrete composite moment
resistant frames, five subassemblages belonging to the momentresistant frames and
far off one steel concrete eccentrically braced frame. These studies formed integral
part of a cooperative research project under the management of ARBED Recherches
Luxembourg.
In the following sections Information is provided about the test specimen (section
D.2), test setup (section D.3) and material properties (section D.4). Subsequently,
the instrumentation for all frames and subassemblages is described in section D.5.
The data acquisition system and test procedure is presented in section D.6. The
test performance, describing the general observed response of the tested frames and
subassemblages, and the test results, showing actual testperformance data, are being
covered in section D.7 and D.8.
D.2 Test Specimen

Within the scope of the overall cooperative program t h e Technical University at Darm
stadt, Institute for Steelcon6truction, was selected to perform the large scale tests of
composite steel concrete momentresistant frames. Following earlier results of beam
column studies, carried at the Politechnico dir Milano, it was decided, t h a t one test
frame should be designed with HSbolted endplated beamcolumn connections, while
the second test frame should be developed having welded beamcolumn joints.
In addition to the above indicated moment resistant frames (MRFs), it was decided
also to study a test frame with the same overall dimensions b u t with an eccentrically
braced stiffening arrangement in one bay.
Accordingly, three, twostory, twobay test frames with overall dimensions of 5.50
m by 10.00 m (2 2.75 m in height and 2 5.00 m in length) have been tested.
In accordance with earlier beam column connection tests, HEA260 and HEB300
sections were choosen, respectively, for all beams and columns (see figure D l ) . A
concrete slab with width and height dimensions of 1.00 m 0.12 m was connected to
the beams by means of headed studs ( 19, 1 = 100 m m ). T h e slab reinforcement
consisted of two Q221 biaxial reinforcing mats, positioned near the top and the
bottom of the slab.
For fireresistant requirements, filledin concrete, reinforced by rebars 4 20 and
stirrups 8 spaced 20 cm, had been placed symmetrically on either side of the web
between the flanges of the beam and column sections (see figure D l ) . In the connec
tion regions the column shearpanel zones of both the exterior and interior columns
had not been reinforced by doubler plates. At the base of the fixedended columns,
base plates were designed elastically to asure the plastic moment development of the
D1
343
bare steel columns. To eleminate resistance uncertanties in the column-base-plate

connections, infilled concrete over the lowest 20 cm of the column had been omited. Also, side plates were added to the flange edges to prevent local failure between
column and base plates.
D.2.1 M o m e n t Resistant Frame 1 (see figure D-2)

T h e first frame had typically HS-bolted endplates butt welded to the beam ends
and bolted to the column flanges. For ease of erection of the prefabricated concrete
filled-in beams, the bolts were arranged above and below the beam flanges. To take
advantage of the load distributing capability of the heavy endplates, continuity plates
were welded between the column flanges at levels corresponding to the upper and lower
edges of the beam endplates, rather than in-line with the beam-flanges.
D.2.2 M o m e n t Resistant Frame 2 (see figure D-3)

T h e second frame had different connection details, with beam flanges welded to the
column flanges by full penetration welds. The beam web was connected to the columnflange by means of HS- bolted shear tabs. Column continuity plates were placed in
line with t h e beam flanges.
D.2.3 Eccentrically-Braced Frame (EBF) (see figure D-4)

T h e ductility of eccentrically-braced frames is concentrated in the so-called shear
links located in the mid-portion of the beams between adjacent braces. Depending
on t h e lenght of the link, either shear- or endmoment yielding will deliver the required
ductility. In this case, with the link designed to exhibit shear yielding, not only the
steel beam-web but also the composite infilled concrete and reinforcing steel - 4 20
longitudinal rebars and 8 stirrups at 5 cm intervalls - would contribute basically to
the shear stiffness and overall resistance.
Because of uncertainty about the degree of participation of the filled-in concrete
in the overall shear-link resistance, the braces were intentially over-designed and were
formed by 2 U 240 sections, interconnected by two side-plates 12 200, fillet welded
over t h e full length of the member. In order to ensure an elastic behaviour of the
brace-connection during the ultimate response of the system under lateral loads, the
braces were welded to edge- stiffened concentric gusset plates. The test-load transfer
into t h e braced bay was ensured by fully welding the beam flanges to the interior
columns. On the other hand, the connection between and exterior columns were
designed as HS-bolted shear tabs.
W i t h the objective of studying the resistant capacity of the composite shear link
within the available horizontal testload capacity, the overall lateral system resistance
344
D2
was intentionally lowered by reducing the column base fixity moment resistance (reducing the width of the column flanges over a certain distance immediately above the
base plates).
D.2.4 Subassemblages (see figure D-5)

In as fax as earlier studies had been focused on assessing the moment-rotaion capacity
of full interior and exterior beam-column connections, the response for the beamcolumn connections at the roof level could only be extrapolated from these earlier test
results. However, in order to permit a better evaluation of the overall frame response,
it was decided, to test also subassemblages of the roof beam-column connections and
the column footing. Particularly, the five tested subassemblages were one footing
point (named Subassemblage 1), two Knee-Joints (Subassemblage 2: HS-bolted and
3: welded) and two T-Joints (Subassemblage 4: HS-bolted and 5: welded).
D.3 Test-Setup
For the test performance a special reaction frame had been designed with a heavy basebeam (HD400x400x551) pre-stressed to the laboratory tie-down slab and connected
by means of a transverse beam at one end to two vertical, parallel loading- trusses
(see figure D-6). The column base plates of the test structures were HS-bolted to
the base-beam. The trusses, interconnected by means of transverse beams, allowed
the application of horizontal loads at each floor level of the test frame through two
double-acting hydraulic actuators. Special loading jokes were designed to introduce
the actuators loads into the test frame at the loading-side at points mid-way between
the outer and inner columns. This loading arrangement had been necessary in order
to prevent direct loading of the exterior column (see figure D-7). Movement normal
to the test-frame was restrained by a stability frame which provided guidance to the
frame at two location at each floor level (see figure D-8).
Considering the large amount of concreting necessary (7.2.m 3 for the beam slabs)
and the serious time limitations set for the test performance, the three full-scale test
specimen were erected immediately adjacent to the loading frame and were concreted
at the same time. After the necessary concrete strength had been reached, test frames
were moved successively into the test position, instrumented and tested.
D.4 Material Properties

The material properties were determined from tensile coupon tests of the steel sections (both flanges and webs), and through concrete compression tests. T h e E-Modulus
D3
345
of steel is assumed to be 205000 mm2, whereas the Modulus of concrete was ob

tained from cylinder tests following DIN 1048. The material properties axe presented
in Tab. Dl, D2 and D3.
D.5 Instrumentation
D.5.1 General
The instrumentation of the specimen was designed to permit both the test controll
and the recording of global and local element deformations as well as local strains.
Load cells were used to measure the horizontal actuator forces acting at the two floor
levels. Displacements were measured by wire transducers (linear potentiometers
LP) with measuring ranges between +/ 10 mm and 600 mm. Direct current linear
voltage displacement transducers (DC DT) were used to record local displacements
with a range of +/ 10 mm. Strain gages had been applied at selected locations to
record the strains in critical regions
D.5.2 M o m e n t Resistant Frames ( M R F , Frames 1 and 2)

D.5.2.1 Global Measurements
In order to determine the overall load response of the two momentresistant frames
linear wire potentiometers were used measuring the deformations at the two floor
levels against a reference frame located opposite the reaction loading frame (figure D
9). In general, the accuracy of the different displacement measurements was enhanced
by presetting the full range for each LP at the maximum expected deformation. In
addition, horizontal LPs were used at intermediate floor levels to permit a more
detailed assessment of the overall frame and column deformations. In this instance
the displacements of the column immediately adjacent to the reference frame were
measured directly. The horizontal displacements of the interior and exterior column
on the loading side were measured indirectly in reference to the adjacent reference
column as depicted in figure D9.
The vertical displacements of the first floor were measured in reference to the
base beam period. The vertical displacements of the upper floor level, however, were
measured relatively to the first floor.
D.5.2.2Xocal Measurements
In order to evaluate the shear distortion of the composite column shear panels, dia
gonally arranged LPs were used to monitor the overall shear distortion.
Although the test frame setup was designed with fully fixed frame columns, it
was nevertheless decided to monitor the column base plate deformations and possible
346
D4
horizontal displacements by means of DCGTs. These measurements were taken in

reference to the tie down slab and base beam, respectively.
In order to possibly determine the normal column forces as well as the column
shear forces and bending moment distributions in each story column, each column
was instrumented with strain gages located at two sections along the column length.
These sections were placed at locations where the column response was expected to
be elastic. In each section single strain gages were positioned oppositely in the middle
of the column flanges.
D.5.3 Eccentrically Braced Frame (EBF, Frame 3)

D.5.3.1 Global M e a s u r e m e n t s
In as far as it was considered necessarry to monitor specifically the behaviour of the
braced bay, the arrangement of the LPs has been concentrated in that region. The
overall horizontal displacements were recorded with respect to the reference frame.
In addition to t h e horizontal floor displacements necessary to control the test, supplemental horizontal column displacements were taken at locations directly opposite
the gusset plate stiffeners (see figure D-10).
In order to monitor the overall shear link displacements, distortions and rotations
for both floor beams, sets of four LP wire gages have been used. For the first floor
link these measurements were taken directly in reference to the base beam. However,
for the upper floor beam these measurements were taken indirectly in reference to the
shear-link portion of the lower floor beam as shown in figure D-10.
D . 5 . 3 . 2 Local M e a s u r e m e n t s
In addition to the global measurements of the shear link distortion, local distortions
were measured by one-sided LPs monitoring the diagonal total shear link deformation
at each floor level.
For measuring the possible slip between the concrete composite floor slab and steel
beam at each floor level in the braced bay, two sets of two transducers (DCDTs) have
been installed as shown in figure D-10.
In order to evaluate the force distribution (axial force, shear force and bending
moment) in the diagonal box-sections, each diagonal was instrumented with two sets
of two strain gages. These gage pairs were located at opposite sides of the box-sections
at cross sections 60 cm away from the edge of the immediately adjacent gusset plate.
D.5.4 Subassemblages
The instrumentation used in the testing of the column base footing involved only
linear displacement transducers (LTs) for the horizontal displacement measurements.
D5
347
This arrangement, together with the three DCDTs layed out to monitor possible base
plate movement and rotation, is shown in figure D - l l .
T h e instrumentation used in the testing of both, the welded and the HS-bolted
Knee-Joint, consisted of two DCDT's, measuring the shear panel rotation at each side
of the specimen, and two linear transducers, one measuring the control displacement
at the load introduction point at the lower end of the specimen, the other one measured the vertical displacement in the middle of the composite steel-concrete beam.
T h e instrumentation scheme is showed in figure D-12.
T h e instrumentation of the T-Joints were almost the same like the above described
of the Knee-Joints. The only difference was a second linear transducer at the other
side of the composite steel-concrete beam column as shown in figure D-13.
T h e instrumentation was designed basically to permit a deformation-load history
assessment similar to that obtained in the connection tests carried out at the Polytechnico di Milano.
D.6 D a t a Acquisition System and Testing Procedure

D.6.1 D a t a Acquisition
The D a t a Acquisition System consists of 64 channel high-speed data collection unit
controlled by a Micro-Vax computer. Using amplifiers and analog-to-digital converters
the various displacement, load and strain measurements were recorded in digitized
form for further data reduction and subsequent interpretation.
An interactive data analysis package for graphical data presentation was used in
conjunction with a P C and commercial software.
D.6.2 Test Procedure

D.6.2.1 General
In order to determine the cyclic force-displacement characteristics of each test-frame in
both the elastic and non-linear ranges, the test specimen were subjected to displacementcontrolled forces. Specifically, the upper floor level was displacement controlled, while
the associated horizontal force at that level was used to force-control the actuator at
the lower floor level at a ratio of 50 % of the recorded upper floor force.
Considering the anticipated overall lateral resistance of the moment test frames, it
was decided to use two servo-controlled actuators with forcing capacities of 1000 kN
in compression and 700 kN in tension (pushing, respectively, pulling). Reflecting the
overall frame stiffness and associated deformations under the above forcing conditions,
348
D6
actuator displacement capacities of +/ 650 m m for the upper and +/ 500 m m for
the lower floor actuators were selected.
It should be noted here that during the first frame test the tensile actuator force
capacity was found to be insufficient to introduce the desirable inelastic displacements
over 190 mm. In as far as similar difficulties could be expected in the E B F test, it
was decided to increase for that purpose, the load capacity of the actuators. This
was achieved by increasing the oil pressure in the hydraulic system from 210 to 280
bar. This pressure increase required a modification of the servo valves. T h e resulting
actuator capacities were thus raised to approximate values of 1300 kN in compression
and 960 kN in tension.
The actual cyclic alternating displacement history for all tests was preprogrammed
and controlled by the Micro-Vax computer. A general overview of the test-control
layout is shown in figure D-14.
D.6.2.2 Displacement Sequence
In general, in the elastic range, the horizontal alternating cyclic displacements were
introduced in half-amplitudes of +/ 0.25, +/ 0.50, +/ 0.75 and +/ 1.00 e y , with
e y being a value which was deliberately chosen to be less than the estimated top-floor
yield displacement at first yielding. This procedure was selected to be certain that
it would be possible to test the structure for at least four cycles in the elastic range.
These increasing cycles were introduced singly. Subsequent cycles were repeated
for a total of three cycles at each displacement step. After the initial first postyield cycle of +/ 2 e y had been introduced, subsequent displacement magnitudes
to assess the cyclic alternating post-yield response were increased in even steps of
+/ 2 ey. The above procedure reflects the "Short Testing Procedure" described in
ECCS-Recommendation No. 45. A graphical presentation of a typical displacement
sequence is shown in figure D-15.
D.6.2.2.1 Frames 1 and 2
Specifically, for both moment-resistant frames the initial elastic horizontal top floor
displacement values were alternatingly 10, 20, 30 and 40 mm, respectively. For test
frame 1, the subsequent displacements were alternatingly 70, 130, 190, 250, 310,
370, 430, 490 mm. Admittedly, these intervalls did not fully agree with the above
noted test procedure. However, for the second test frame the test objectives were
fully implemented and displacements of 80, 160, 240, 320, 400 m m were alternatingly
introduced. After having reached the maximum amplitude the test sequence was
terminated. However, it was decided to use the frame for investigating a typical postearthquake frame response after substantial damages had already been introduced.
Details are presented in Section D.8.
D7
349
D.6.2.2.2 F r a m e 3
In principle, recognizing the increased lateral load capacity of the E B F test frame it
had been decided, as noted previously in Section D.6.2.1 under General, to increase
t h e actuator capacities to about 1300 kN in compression and 960 kN in tension.
Reflecting the considerable stiffness of the excentrically braced frame the elastic
alternating cyclic top-floor displacements to be introduced initially were set at maximum values of 2, 4, 6 and 8 mm, respectively. Subsequently, it was intended to
introduce horizontal displacements with increasing steps of 8 mm, thus resulting in
total alternating displacements of 16 mm, 24 mm, 32 mm, 40 mm, etc. at the topfloor level. These displacements were to be applied three times at each displacement
increment.
Unfortunately, the above intended testing schedule could not be executed because
of load capacity limitations. Instead an alternative test procedure was selected during
t h e actual test. Details will be presented as part of Section D.8 .
D.6.2.2.3 Subassemblages
In the single column test, controlled alternating elastic displacements with maximum
values of 5, 10, 15 and 20 mm, respectively, were introduced at the actuator load level.
Hereby, reflected the 20 m m single-displacement amplitude the yield displacement at
t h a t level associated with first yielding due to the column base yield moment. These
initial cycles were applied singly. The inelastic colunm base behaviour was studied
under increasing alternating displacements at the actuator level of respectively, 40,
80, 120, 160, 200 and 240 mm.
During the remaining four tests of the roof-subassemblages the same controlled
alternating displacements were introduced at the actuator load level. Particularly,
cycles with maximum values of 2.5, 5, 7.5 and 10 m m displacement were applied
singly. Hereby, the amplitude of 10 m m represented the analysed yield displacement
associated with first yielding due to the shear panel moment. T h e following cycles
were repeated for a total of three cycles at each displacement step. T h e first post
yield cycles had a maximum alternating displacement of 20 m m . Afterwards the
displacement steps were increased in even steps of alternatingly + / - 20 m m (40, 60,
80 mm,...) until a significant loss of the stiffness of the specimen appeared.
D.7 Test Performance

In this chapter experimental data obtained from the tests will be presented in detail. Firstly, the behaviour of the specimen during the tests is described. Subsequently, load-displacement relationships as well as moment-rotation curves are presented. Also, curves showing the relation between the story-shear force and the
350
D8
story-drift for the different specimen are shown.

In addition to the above presentations describing the overall response of the tested
frames under cyclic alternating increasing displacements a number of graphs have
been prepared following ECCS Recommendation No.45 concerning such quantities as
"partial ductility", "full ductilty ratio", "resistance-" and "rigidity ratio" and at least
"absorbed energy" and "resistance drop" ratios.
D.7.1 Test Behaviour

D.7.1.1 B e h a v i o u r of M R F t e s t f r a m e s 1 a n d 2
The response of the two moment resistant frames was basically similar. As such, the
first frame ( with HS-bolted beam-column connections) exhibited first yielding simultaneously in both the lower panel zone of t h e interior column and in the end regions
of the first floor beams near the exterior columns. Specifically, diagonal cracking of
the concrete in the panel zone and vertical cracking of the concrete near the girder
ends (reflecting the plastic moment development) was observed. Under increasing
displacements additional shear cracks in the slab above the first-floor inner columngirder connection occured because of progressive shear distortion of the panel zone
and associated angular rotation. At this stage also slight diagonal cracking at the
panel zone of the exterior columns at t h e first floor level was observed.
Meanwhile, at t h e base of both t h e interior and exterior columns extensive yielding
signified the development of plastic moments in these regions. In fact, with the lowercolumn yield zone in each of the columns gradually extending over a height of about
80 cm, a significant strain hardening effect in this overall region must have occured.
Under increased loading the same response described above for the first-floor level
was also observed at the upper floor-level column panel zones and beams.
In the ultimate testing phase a significant loss of resistance was observed under
repeated cyclic displacements. This behaviour could basically be attributed to the
local connection response. The frame with the HS-bolted endplate connections showed increasing local plastic deformations of the column flanges in the bolted region;
particularly, at the first-floor exterior beam-column connections where the column
shear panel zone provided effectively a 100 % larger connection resistance than at the
interior beam-column joint. Failure resulted from either bolt fracture or a tearing of
the column flanges. In both instances extensive local destruction did occur.
In the initial test phases, up to overall yielding, the frame with fully-welded beamcolumn connections exhibited basically the same response as noted before. In the
final phase, however, the response of the welded connections was locally less ductile
than observed for the basically semi-rigid bolted joints. The ultimate behaviour
of the welded beam flanges was affected by a nonuniform strain distribution across
the width of the lower flanges under positive bending moments. For the first-floor
D9
351
beams connected to the exterior columns initial cracking in the heat-affected zones of
the mid-flange region underneath the beam web was noted. Under increasing loads,
sudden failure of beam flanges occured through a full-width tearing of the flanges.
This behaviour caused a significant loss of overall stiffness and resistance.
D . 7 . 1 . 2 B e h a v i o u r of E B F t e s t frame 3
The behaviour of the EBF differed fundamentally from t h a t observed in the M R F
tests. Here, the energy dissipation was concentrated in the beam shear-links formed
by the eccentric bracing arrangement. Because of the intentionally reduced column
cross sections at the base plates, throughout most of the test only yielding in the link
regions could be observed. This development signified a shear yielding of the steel
beam web and was associated with diagonal cracking of the beam filled-in concrete
(resulting in a concrete truss action). In this stage the composite slab, showing
also strongly inclined shear cracks, followed the observed link shear distortions. A
significant loss of stiffnes and resistance which was observed near the end of the test
could, after post-test removal of the concrete in the link zone, be attributed to a shear
tearing of the beam web near the bottom flange adjacent to the vertical stiffener. In
the final phase limited yielding occured in the reduced lower column sections as well
as at the semi-rigid shear tab connections in the unbraced bay.
D . 7 . 1 . 3 B e h a v i o u r of S u b a s s e m b l a g e s
D.7.1.3.1 Behaviour of Subassemblage 1
The column footing test showed an excellent ductile behaviour associated with the
typical phenomenon of flange yielding and buckling, diagonal cracking of the infilled
concrete and ultimate failure of the flanges in the heat-affected zone. As observed
also in the subsequent moment frame tests a considerable strain hardening over a
significant region of the lower column occured. This resulted in an extended yield
zone of up to 80 cm above the base plate.
In a very early state of the test the failure mechanism, which was observed during
the HS-bolted Knee-joint test, could be attributed to the plastic deformation of
the column flange assisted by bolt fracture at the lower end of the beam-end plate.
Concrete failure appeared hardly, either in the shear panel nor the infilled concrete
of the beam or the floor concrete.
The response of the welded Knee-Joint differed fundamentally from the above
described behaviour of the HS-bolted one. The specimen exhibited first yielding at
the lower beam-flange. Afterwards initial cracking in the infilled concrete of the beam
352
D10
occured, followed by first diagonal cracking in the shear panel concrete. The floor
concrete cracked in a typical manner as a result of the compression forces at the upper
connection region. In the ultimate testing phase the lower beam-flange buckled and
cracked afterwards.
The HS-bolted T-Joint exhibited first yielding in the panel zone. Specifically,
diagonal cracking of the concrete in the panel zone was observed. Under increasing
displacements additional shear cracks in the slabs occured because of progressive shear
distorsion of the panel zone and associated angular rotation. Flange yielding of the
lower beam flange did not occur during the test. This behaviour could basically be
attributed to bolt slippage of the lower bolts at a very early phase of the test. In the
final phase the steel-panel zone fractured. This behaviour caused a significant loss of
overall stiffness and resistance.
The response of the welded T-Joint was similar to the response of subassemblage
4 described above. Both joints exhibited yielding mainly in the shear panels. First
damage took place in the shear-panel infilled concrete, after initial diagonal cracking
during the first cycles, extensive destruction of the shear panel concrete did occur.
Afterwards the composite slab cracked followed by the fracture of the column flange
near the weld. T h e severe loss of resistance at the end of the test could be attributed
to the horizontal fracture of the shear panel starting from the cracked beam flange.
D.8 Test Results

D.8.1 General
In this section the different load displacement histories are presented graphically for
each of the three frames tested. Specifically the following graphs are presented:
Force - Displacement Diagram
Moment - Total Rotation Diagram
Shear - Story-Drift (1.Story) Diagram
Shear - Story-Drift (2.Story) Diagram
In formulating these diagrams the following defined quantities as shown in figure
D-16 are presented:
Force / Displacement
D11
353
Displacement top floor displacement recorded at the upper right hand

corner (Displacement A)
Force sum of the forces of the upper and lower actuator (i*i + F?)
Moment / Total Rotation
Rotation system rotation ( Displacement A / H)

Moment total moment under the acting forces (Fi hi + F2 H)
Shear / StoryDrift (l.Story)
Rotation rotation in lower story ( Displacement / hi)
Shear Force total shearforce in lower story (F\ + F2)
Shear / StoryDrift (2.story)

Rotation rotation in upper story ((Displacement A Displacement B ) / ^ )
Shear Force total shearforce in upper story (F2)
Afterwards the different load displacement histories are presented graphically for
each of the five subassemblages tested. For each specimen, besides Subassemblage 1,
the following two graphs are presented:
Moment vs. Total Rotation
Moment vs. Shear Panel Rotation
For Subassemblage 1 only the Moment vs. Total Rotation diagram is presented.

T h e forcedisplacement diagram for test frame 1 is presented in figure D17. Although
it was intended to follow the cyclic alternating displacement sequence discussed in Sec
tion D.6.2 and shown in figure D15, difficulties arose because of insufficient actuator
capacity under tension (pulling on the frame). In fact the maximum tensile capacity
of both actuators (1.5 700 kN) failed to cause systematically top floor displacements
beyond about 220 mm. As a result, the forcedisplacement diagram shows a stagnated
displacement sequence in tension between about 220 m m and 300 mm. Only after
the load resistance had dropped again below t h e 1050 kN force level it was possible
again to introduce the prescribed frame displacements.
Results indicated that up to a level of 190 m m the hysteretic behaviour is very
stable. Even up to a level of 370 m m the load resistance drop is less than 10 %.
354
D12
However, an unstable nonlinear stiffness behaviour could be observed in the earlier

displacement cycles; particularly, in the cycle with a maximum displacement of 130
m m . This latter behaviour can most likely be attributed to a nonlinear behaviour of
the column-flange at the concrete interface.
The moment-total rotation and the shear-story drift diagrams, for both the first
and second stories, are presented in figures D-18, D-19 and D-20. All three graphs
show a similar displacement stagnation pattern as noted before.

The force-displacement diagram for test frame 2 is presented in figure D-21. Basically
the record shows that the tensile actuator forcing capacity was adequate to induce
systematic cyclic displacements. Results indicated that the hysteretic loops were
stable up to a displacement level of at least 160 mm. Unfortunately the large, ECCS
recommended, displacement intervalls did not permit capturing the instance in which
the hysteretic loops started to show a reduction of the lateral load resistance under
repeated displacement applications. However, this loss of resistance could clearly be
first observed at a displacement of 240 mm. Repeated loads at t h a t level showed a
resistance drop which can be attributed to failure of the beam-to-column flange welds
(identified typically by small kinks in the force-displacement diagram).
Similar to the diagrams presented for frame 1, figures D-22, D-23 and D-24 present the moment-rotation and the two shear-story drift relationships for frame 2,
respectively.
Following the completion of the typical test a post-earthquake response study was
undertaken. In t h a t case, as shown in figure D-25, the test frame was loaded again to
induce a tensile lateral displacement of 320 mm. From t h a t level the specimen was
subjected to a displacement of 320 m m and subsequently, cyclically to displacements of nominally + / - 240, 160, 80, 40 and 20 mm. T h e results show an excellent
response whereby , despite the high nonlinear exposure and damages experienced
before, the frame returned basically to the. original undistorted load-free position.
Figure D-26 shows the moment-total rotation relationship of the frame during the
latter test sequence.

As noted before in Section D.6.2.1 the actuator capacities for the E B F test frame studies had been raised to about 1300 kN in compression and 960 kN in tension through
increasing the operating oil pressure from 210 to 280 bars. This load capacity limit
can be identified in the force-displacement diagram shown in figure D-27. The results
indicated that it was only possible to introduce the initially specified displacements
only up to a maximum level of +/ 16 m m . At that stage the total tensile actuator
D13
355
forcing capacity of about 1.4 MN (1.5 0.96 MN) had been reached. As a result, only
a programmed lateral displacement sequence under compression could be attained up
to a horizontal displacement of 32 m m .
Similar to the test presentation for frames 1 and 2, figure D28 shows the EBF
momenttotal rotation relationship. Figures D29 and D30 show the storyshear
versus storydrift graphs for the first and second story, respectively.
After this displacement level had been reached three times, it was decided to re
duce the displacement magnitudes cyclically to 24, 16 and 8 mm, successively. This
displacement loadhistory was considered to reflect a decreasing earthquake displa
cement exposure following an initial increasing displacement sequence. The above
procedure was deemed important to assess the cyclic response of the E B F test frame
before further introducing large displacement excursions into the inelastic compres
sive load range. In this displacement reducing phase only single full displacement
cycles were introduced as can be seen in figure D27; note the reduced load resistance
in the compression side of the single hysteric loops at 24, 16 and 8 mm.
The same single cyclicalternating exposure (maximum displacements of 16, 24 and
32 mm) was followed in order to bring t h e test frame back to a maximum displacement
of 32 m m .
After having reached this displacement the original testing procedure was conti
nued with introducing three maximum alternating displacement cycles of 40, 48
and 56 mm, respectively. It was recognized that in the tensile side of the cycles the
corresponding displacements could not be reached because of the previously noted
tensile load limit. However, unfortunately, the calibration setting of the actuators in
compression brought a further limitation, resulting in the fact that the actual loads
associated with displacements of more than about 40 m m could not be recorded
(see figure D27). Fortunately, an independent recording of the actuator loads indi
cated that the maximum total horizontal forces at 40, 48 and 56 m m were
equal to about 1.84 MN, 1.91 MN and 1.95 MN, respectively. In the third cycle at
56 m m the load resistance had only dropped to about 1.80 MN, showing a quite
stable hysteretic behaviour of the frame. Following this load sequence the test was
stopped at a zero level displacement.
Because of load limitations in general which prevented studying the EBF test
frame as far as possible it was decided to alter the load arrangement in principle by
loadcontrolling the lower actuator at 100 %, rather than 50 %, of the top floor load.
Also, the calibration setting for both actuators were altered to permit full recording
of the actuator loads in the data acquisition system.
In the next test sequence the tensile loads were brought to their maximum capacity
of about 1.9 MN in total without reaching the intended displacement of + 56 mm.
From that point on the test sequence was programmed to reach a displacements of
56 m m and subsequently cyclic nominal alternating displacements of +/ 48, 40, 32,
24, 16 and 8 mm. This single cyclic hysteretic behaviour is depicted in figure D31.
356
D14
The results clearly indicate t h a t only at a 16 m m horizontal top floor displacement

a full cycle could be archieved within the forcing capacity of the test setup. On the
other hand the results are most satisfactory as they clearly show the efficiency of the
brace frame under reduced earthquake effects following a substantial overstressing
of the system. The associated moment vs. total rotation relationship for this test
sequence is presented in figure D-32.
In the final test sequence - with an initial displacement offset of about 6 mm the braced-frame test structure was first subjected to single hysteretic load cycles of
8 and 16 m m . Subsequently, the test frame was subjected alternatingly to increasing
nominal displacements from 24 m m up to 96 mm. In this process displacement intervals of 8 m m were introduced. As shown in figure D-33, the prescribed displacements
in the negative zone (pushing) could be achieved without difficulty. In the possitive
zone the forcing was limited by the + 1.9 MN capacity over a substantial part of the
test sequence. Only after substantial failure of the shear link had occured, the tensile
load capacity was sufficiently large to also introduce a nominal displacement of 88
m m in t h e tension direction (pulling).
Using t h e test data of the last test sequence, figure D-34 presents the momenttotal rotation relationship. Story-shear vs. story-drift response data are presented
for b o t h t h e first and second story in figures D-35 and D-36, respectively.
D.8.5 Test Results Subassemblages

T h e moment-total rotation relationship of the fixed column is presented in figure D37. T h e results show an excellent hysteretic ductile behaviour of the column footing
connection. Because of t h e very high stiffness of the column base connection, the
force relaxation - which can be observed from the load reductions following each
displacement level - does not require a modification of the depicted energy-absorbing
capacity of this connection.
The moment-total rotation diagram of the HS-bolted Knee-joint is presented in figure
D-38. Results indicated t h a t the initial slip between the beam-end plate and the
column flange occured in a very early phase of the test, particularly in the cycle with
a m a x i m u m displacement of 20 m m . During the next steps of displacement the flange
yielding increased. At a maximum displacement of 80 m m there is a significant drop
in the moment-total rotation diagram, belonging to the failure of the first of the lower
bolts. Afterwards, at the first cycle with a alternating displacement of about 100 mm,
the second bolt fractured and the test was aborted. The moment-shear panel rotation
D15
357
diagram (Fig. D-39) shows a very small maximum shear-panel rotation of about 0.7
% according to the failure mechanism at the column flange.
The moment-total rotation relationship of the welded Knee-Joint (Fig. D-40) shows
a very stable hysteretic ductile behaviour during the test. Up to a level of alternating
displacements of about 120 mm there was no significant loss of resistance. Because
of the quality of the welding (half sided full penetration weld with an added filled
weld on the back side) no brittle fracture of the welds occured. The severe loss of
resistance, according to the cracking of the lower flange occurs during the first cycle
with a maximum displacement of 140 mm. As shown in figure D-41 (moment - shearpanel rotation diagram) an unstable nonlinear stiffness behaviour of the shear panel
could be observed. This behaviour can be attributed to the nonlinear behaviour of
the infilled shear-panel concrete (diagonal cracking, according to concrete truss action
in the column shear panel) up to the fracture of the concrete strut during the third
cycle of about 120 mm.
The moment vs. total rotation diagram of the HS-bolted T-Joint, as presented in
figure D-42, shows a very stable hysteretic ductile behaviour also. During the cycles
with the same displacement amplitudes the resistance decreased according to the concrete failure in the panel zone. During the cycle with a maximum displacement of 140
mm the shear panel fractured and the test was aborted. Although the moment-total
rotation relationship is nearly symmetric, the hysteresis of the shear panel rotation,
depicted in figure D-43, is removed to the positive rotation range. This could be achieved to the sum of the effects of bolt-slippage and local destruction of the composite
slab.
The results of the last test (welded T-Joint) are presented in figures D-44 and D45. The moment-total rotation rotationship of the subassemblage 5 is similar to the
above described one of subassemblage 4. During the first cycle with a maximum
displacement of +/ 100 mm the column flange fracture (as can be seen in figure
D-44) caused a sudden decrease of the load resistance. Afterwards the horizontal
cracking of the shear panel took place, according to the severe loss of resistance and
the test was aborted. The moment-shear panel rotation relationship is shown in figure
D-45.
358
D16
D.8.6 I n t e r p r e t a t e d Test Results following EC C S Recom

mendation N o . 45
In order to permit an assessment of the response of the moment test frames according
to the EC C S Recommendations No.45, a number of graphs have been prepared and
are presented in the following manner:
Full ductility funktion ( 0 )
Relative resistance function e ()
Relative rigidity function ( 0 )
Relative absorbed energy function ()
Resistance drop function e* ( 0 )
For each frame two sets of graphs have been developed. In the first set the first
yield event has been defined according to the Recommendations and reflected the
force or a moment associated with the point of intersection between the elastic and
reduced (10 % of elastic) stiffness values of each frame (see figure D46). These graphs
are depicted in figures D48 D57 for frame 1 and in figures D58 D67 for frame 2.
In the second set the first yield event has been defined as the force or moment
associated with first observed yielding; specifically, the point at which the load or
moment curves start to deviate from the observed initial linearelastic response (see
figure D47). These graphs are depicted in figures D68 D77 for frame 1 and in
figures D78 D87 for frame 2.
D.8.7 Synthesis of t h e Experimental Results

In order to compare the experimental results, we give the following quantities in Tab.
D4 and D5.
My
M*
*
M2.5

Total rotation corresponding to My
Total rotation corresponding to M*
Bending moment [kNm] corresponding to a total rotation = 2.5%
Maximum total rotation reached during the test and allowing
three complete cycles without failure
Mu
Bending moment corresponding to
u/v " C onventional maximum ductility ratio
/2.5% Ductility margin in respect the limit of 2.5% assumed by many
D17
359
researchers as the maximum value of story drift allowable during

a severe seismic event
Hereby, according to section D.8.6, two different definitions of the yield moment
had been used.
My corresponds to the intersection between the elastic slope and the line tangent to
the plastic branch having a slope of 1/10 of the elastic stiffness.
M* corresponds to the first yield event during the test.
360
D18
TABLES
0 1 9
361
STEEL SEC TIONS

Flanges
FRAME 1
GIRDER
COLUMN
FRAME 2
GIRDER
FRAME 3
SUB 1
SUB 2 5
COLUMN
GIRDER
COLUMN
GIRDER
GIRDER
COLUMN
kN/cm2
31.8
25.9
28.3
25.1
27.7
26.6
27.6
34.7
27.3
Webs
kN/cm2
43.3
40.0
42.0
39.6
41.4
41.1
40.0
43.6
40.9
26.7
31.9
33.3
36.7
32.3
35.4
27.8
30.2
33.2
kN/cm2
34.6
33.3
33.6
31.6
34.9
32.0
30.6
37.6
30.5
kN/cm2
43.8
42.7
44.5
40.5
42.4
42.4
41.3
47.1
40.8
21.1
26.2
27.1
31.3
24.0
27.2
25.6
27.3
32.3
TABLE Dl : SteelSections Material Properties
REBARS
kN/cm2
56.3
kN/cm2
63.3
e
%
15.1
TABLE D2 : Rebars Material Properties
CONCRETE
FRAME 1/2
FRAME 3
SUB 25
INF. C ONC R.
SLAB
PANEL ZONE
INF. C ONC R.
SLAB
SLAB
fed (7c = 1.0)

kN/cm2
2.64
2.35
2.99
2.90
2.18
E
kN/cm2
2665
2020
2617
1826
1943
TABLE D3 : C oncrete Material Properties
362
D20
My
FRAME 1
FRAME
, 0
TTp Q
,
"
T m j.
Ex
erimental
P
Design
Experimental
Design
Experimental
Design
Experimental
Design
Experimental
Design
Experimental
Design
[kNm]
3490
2280
3780
2280
384
251
288
251
520
506
480
506
[kNm]
4281
Mu
[kNm]
4990
0 u /2.5%
6.7
6.5
2.68
4357
4754
5.7
5.6
2.26
315
420
5.8
2.1
2.32
M2.5%
%
1.03
0.51
1.01
0.51
2.85
0.58
1.35
0.58
1.95
0.68
2.21
0.68
332
385
7.1
5.3
2.84
532
578
8.7
4.5
3.84
466
458?
5.6
2.5
2.24
/;
/2.5%
7.53
2.68
TABLE D4: Experimental Results according to My
M*
y
FRAME 1
FRAME
QTp 0
QR Q
rypv .
CTTp
,,
[kNm]
3022
2280
3051
2280
302
251
217
251
Experimental
362
506
Design
324
Experimental
506
Design
Ex
Perimental
Design
Experimental
Design
Experimental
Design
Experimental
Design
;
%
0.89
0.51
0.85
0.51
2.01
0.58
0.94
0.58
1.31
0.68
1.22
0.68
[kNm]
4281
Mu
[kNm] %
4990 6.7
4357
4754
5.7
6.66
2.26
315
420
5.8
2.89
2.32
332
385
7.1
7.56
2.84
532
578
8.7
6.64
3.48
466
458
5.6
4.54
2.24
TABLE D5: Experimental Results according to M*
D21
363
FIGURES
364
D22
1000
HEA260
HEB 300
Figure Dl: C ross Sections Girder aud Column
rfcr
\
HEA260
HEB 300
HEB300
HEB 300
\HEA260
HEA260
wJ
m
LLL
^^1
45W
HEA260
F^
III
1000
4000
JCjJO
sooo
woo
5O00
1000 J SDP L
300
2M 30 (10.91
m
fSf
+i+
HEB 300
Figure D2: Moment Resistant Frame 1 HSbolted
D23
365
r+T
ih
J+L
H EA 260
\HEA 260
H EB 300
HEB 300
HEB300
EA 260
H EA 260
H^H
'-^
[ SOO
1000 j
t^d
tooo
5000
looo
1000
5000
TOPO
500
?4
l
2H27 (10.9)
HEA260
Figure D3: Moment Resistant Frame 2 welded
366
D24
-53:
\ SOO ^
1000
coco
^^==.
1000
5000
1.000
5000
1000
500
Figure D -4: Eccentrically Braced Frame 3
D25
367
5000
2500
/////$.
2500
/ / / /,'/ / W;,' / // / /; / s / / y ;
HEA260
' / / / / /
'/y.'-///s
/ /
-///'/
7V ^ ' 7 ^ 7 ^ ' V ^ / " 7
" Q) ' r
vOTD
2085
375
Figure D-5: Subassemblages
368
D26
1
ii
3.
_L
ra
ta
m
3
II
AA.

ft&
iff
1"
5000
2500
2500
ES
H3
, 1500
=3
5000
7000
,1500
Figure D6: Test Setup
D27
369
HEB 220
7
HEB50Q
'X
^
Figure D7: Load Introduction System
T\Y////.^y)///77T[\
,|
iI
't
uzzo
! t
<
<
UJ
UJ
|
1
I
1
ni.
I
AtJ.
U 220
Figure D8: Lateral Guidance

370
D28
2 F
Ift
rao
_nai
ira.
T7SQ
25_.
f ,
_JCi.
if
I I
3 ^
;<
# tjt
!
.'
*t\
! ;
><
;<
^1i V
^
^r
ffiC
s/n?/tyjAj'/*/.<y/).\Jj#.\//
i-SB-i*?
^r
MJ9UI\H&IUH
fj I
^LP
Strain Gage
Figure D5: Measuring Equipment Frames 1 and 2
tV
*:
LP
Strain Gage
Figure D10: Measuring Equipment Frame 3
371
D29
2775
CD
O
ON
1900
CO
975
co
s?
'
^T
Figure Dll: Measuring Equipment Subassemblage 1
980
Ln
o
co
Figure D12: Measuring Equipment Subassemblage 2 and 3
372
D30
,300^
980
980
o
LTI
CNI
o
CO
-&
Figure D13: Measuring Equipment Subassemblage 4 and 5
CONTROLSYSTEM:
ACTUATOR
Micro Vax
TESTSPECIMEN
LVD
Fi Loadcell A
loClor
. M H .
RR.Q6RM
^fe?
TOT
V777,
ACTUAL
IMTRERiii;^NPUT
j.v.v.'.v.'.'i'.'.O.'A'.'.'.'I'.'A'.'i'X' /F
;;D;.
2
BJiii
'
' '
"
INPUT
ACTUAL
Figure D14: Data Arouisit.ion System

D31
373
V777Z
- Time
Figure D -15: D isplacement Sequence
F2
Disp.A
Fi
Disp.B
ZT
Figure D -16: Schematical D escription of the measured values
374
D32
FRAME 1
FORCE /
DISPLACE ME NT
1.20

ld
-500
Figure D -17
-100
100
500
DISPLACEMENT [ m m ]
FRAME 1
MOMENT / TOTAL ROTATION
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
2
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
-4.00
-5.00
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D -18:
D33
375
FRAME 1
SHEAR /
STORY-DRIFT 1 .STORY
1.2
ir
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D -19:
FRAME 1
SHEAR / STORY-DRIFT 2.ST0RY
700
l
[il
O
(
O
I
V)
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D -20:
376
D34
FRAME 2
FORCE /
DISPLAC EMENT
2
ll
UI
ir
o
-400
200
-200
400
Figure D-21:
FRAME 2
2
l_l
IZ
UJ
o
2
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D -22:
D35
377
FRAME 2
U.
V)
1.1
1
0.9
0.
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0,4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
-0.8
-0.9
-1
SHEAR /
STORY-DRIFT 1.STORY
-1.1
-0.08

-0.06
~~I
-0.04.
1
-0.02
0.02
1
0.04
0.06
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D -23:
FRAME 2
SHEAR /
STORY-DRIFT 2.ST0RY
700

U1
ir
li.
-0.06
-0.04
0.08
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D -24:
378
D36
FRAME 2
FORCE /
DISPLAC EMENT
600
UI
-400
-200
200
400
Figure D -25:
FRAME z b
2
I
UI
0.04
0.06
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D -26:
D37
379
FRAME 3
FORCE /
DISPLACEMENT
-20
0
Figure D-27:
FRAME 3
0
1 2
-0.012
1
-0.008
1
-0.004
I
0.004
I
0.008
1
0.012
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D-28:
380
D38
FRAME 3
SHEAR /
STORY-DRIFT 1.STORY
ce
-0.5
-1.5
0.012
ROTATION
[/]
Figure D -29:
FRAME 3
SHEAR / STORY-DRIFT 2.STORY
-1.4
-0.012
-0.004
0.012
0
ROTATION
[/]
Figure D -30:
D39
381
FRAME 3B
FORCE / DISPLAC EMENT
UI
:
o
Figure D-31:
DISPLACEMENT [mm]
FRAME 3B
E
2
UI
2
O
2
-0.012
-0.004
0
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D-32:
382
D40
FRAME 3C
FORCE /
DISPLACEMENT
2
UJ
cu
0.5
100
80
20
100
Figure D33:
FRAME 3C
7
6
5
4
^ j ^ ^ V y / 7
/T/Y/zr//,
///ml' 1
E
2
i_l
H
Z
LU
O
2
0.02
0.01
0.01
1
0.02
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D34:
D41
383
FRAME 3C
SHEAR /
STORY-DRIFT 1.STORY
2
IxJ
o
li.
-0.5 -
-1.5
-0.025
-0.005
ROTATION
Figure D-35:
0.005
0.015
0.025
[/]
FRAME 3C
SHEAR /
STORY-DRIFT 2.ST0RY
II
oir
ou.
i
-0.016
0.004
ROTATION
0.00B
0.012
0.016
[/]
Figure D -36:
384
D42
SUBASSEMBLAGE 1
BOO
iii
O
2
-0.01
0.01
0.07
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D-37:
D43
385
SUBASSEMBLAGE 2: KNEEJOINT HSBOLTED

MOMENT/TOTAL ROTATION
500
400
\z
hi
2
O
2
100
400
500
O.OB
0.06
Figure D38:
0.04
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
SUBASSEMBLAGE 2: KNEEJOINT HSBOLTED

MOMENT/SHEAR PANEL ROTATION
500
UI
2
O
2
0.007
0.005
Figure D39:
386
0.001
0.003
0.005
0.007
ROTATION [ / ]
D44
SUBASSEMBLAGE 3: K NEE-JOINT WELDED

MOMENT/TOTAL ROT AT ION
400
300
200
I-
LI
2
O
2
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D-40:
SUBASSEMBLAGE 3: K NEE-JOINT WELDED

MOMENT/SHEAR PANEL ROT AT ION
400
300
200
-100
-300
E
z
jf
UI
2
O
2
-400
-0.04
0.02
-0.02
0.04
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D-41:
D45
387
SUBASSEMBLAGE 4: T-JOINT HS-BOLTE D

700
11
0.11
Rotation [ / ]
Figure D -42:
SUBASSEMBLAGE 4: T-JOINT HS-BOLTE D

MOMENT / SHE AR PANE L ROTATION
700
E
z

I-
z
UJ
2
o
2
-600
0.02
-0.02
0.04
Rotation [ / ]
Figure D-43:
388
D46
SUBASSEMBLAGE 5: TJOINT WELDED

\z
LJ
O
.
400
1
0.01
I
0.03
0.05
0.07
ROTATION [ / ]
Figure D44:
SUBASSEMBL^GE 5: TJOINT WELDED

MOMENT /
600
500
SHEAR PANEL ROTATION
je
L_i
Z
UJ
O
2
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.05
0.07
ROTATION [ / ]
Fieure D45:
D47
389
Fy-
Figure D-46:
390
Figure D-47
D48
FRAME 1
Full Ductility +
2 -
1.9
i.a 1.7
1.6
1.5
1,4
1.3
1.2 1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0.7
0,6.0,5
0.4
0,3
0.2
0,1
0 2
10
Figure D-48:
FRAME 1
Full Ductility
Figure D -49:
D49
391
FRAME
Relative Resistance
2 -r
1,9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1,4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1 0,9
0,8
0.7
0.6
0,5
0,4
0.3
0,2
0.1
Figure D -50:
10
FRAME 1
Relative Resistance
Figure D-51:
392
D50
FRAME 1
Relative Rigidity +
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
10
Figure D -52:
FRAME 1
Relative Rigidity
2 -1.9
1.8
1.7
1,6
1.5
1.4 1.3
1.2
1.1
1 0.9
0,8
0.7
0.6
0,5
0.4
0,3
0.2
0.1
T
4
10
Figure D-53:
D51
393
FRAME 1
Figure D-54:
FRAME 1
Figure D-55:
394
D52
FRAME 1
Resistance Drop +
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2 1.1
1
0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5
0.4
0.3 0.2 0.1
0
T
2
10
Figure D -56:
FRAME 1
Resistance Drop -
Figure D -57:
D53
395
FRAME 2
Full Ductility +
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Figure D -58:
FRAME 2
Full Ductility -
Figure D -59:
396
D54
FRAME 2
1.9
1.8
1.7 1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Figure D -60:
1
4
+
FRAME 2
Relative Resistance
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Figure D-61:
D55
397
FRAME 2
Relative Rigidity +
JsJI
Figure D-62:
FRAME 2
Relative Rigidity
Figure D-63:
398
D56
FRAME 2
Relative Absorped Energy +
Figure D-64:
FRAME 2
Relative Absorped Energy
Figure D-65:
D57
399
FRAME 2
Resistance Drop +
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Figure D -66:
+
FRAME 2
Resistance Drop
Figure D -67:
400
058
FRAME 1
Full Ductility +
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4 1.3
1.2
1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
10
Figure D-68:
12
"T14
16
18
20
+ [ Vdy ]
FRAME 1
Full Ductility -
- [ Vdy ]
Figure D -69:
D59
401
FRAME 1
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
~
2
~i
8
1
10
1
12
1
12
1
14
1
14
1
16
1
16
r~
18
20
+ [ Vdy ]
Figure D-70:
FRAME 1
Relative Resistance
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
"1
I
4
I
6
1
8
1
10
18
20
- [ Vdy ]
Figure D-71:
402
D60
FRAME 1
Relative Rigidity
1.9
1.B
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
~T
2
Figure D72:
I
4
I
6
I
8
1
10
1
12
1
14
1
16
1
18
1
20
+ [ Vdy ]
FRAME 1
Relative Rigidity
[ Vdy ]
Figure D73:
D61
403
FRAME 1
+ [ Vdy ]
Figure D-74:
FRAME 1
- [ Vdy ]
Figure D-75:
404
D62
FRAME 1
Resistance Drop +
+ I Vdy ]
Figure D -76:
FRAME 1
Resistance Drop
Figure D-77:
D63
405
FRAME 2
Full Ductility +
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 -
-
12
10
1
14
16
+ [ Vdy ]
Figure D-78:
FRAME 2
Full Ductility 1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Figure D-79:
406
-10
12
14
16
- [ Vdy ]
D64
FRAME 2
1.9
1.8 1.7
1.6
1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 -
1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0.7 0.6.0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Figure D -80:
10
12
~
14
1
16
+ [ Vdy ]
FRAME 2
Relative Resistance
- [ Vdy ]
Figure D-81:
D65
407
FRAME 2
Relative Rigidity +
-
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 -
-10
12
14
16
12
14
16
+ [ Voy ]
Figure D-82:
FRAME 2
Relative Rigidity
2
1.9
1.8
.7 1.6
1.5 1.4
1.3 -
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 -
10
- [ Vdy ]
Figure D-83:
408
D66
FRAME 2
Relative Absorped Energy +
+ [ Vdy ]
Figure D -84:
FRAME 2
Relative Absorped Energy
3.5
3 -
2.5 -
2 -
1.5
1 -
0.5 -
- [ Vdy ]
Figure D -85:
D67
409
FRAME 2
Resistance Drop +
2
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
10
12
-T
14
16
+ [ Vdy ]
Figure D-86:
FRAME 2
Resistance Drop
- [ Vdy ]
Figure D-87:
410
D68
Appendix E
Material list
from comparing concrete to composite
structures
411
Project 1
Reinforced concrete solution
E1
413
Basic C onditions
warehouse building, 4 storeys
strong earthquake, Greece
3 bays, 9 m each
6 m spacing of frames
frames loaded in plane only
live load 5 kN/m/m
fire resistance class R 90
composite frame suited for prfabrication
EC 8 Design Response spectra

Composite Frame and R/CFrame
0.4
a)
g 0.3
8 0.2
3
<
co
c
o
Q.
^>..
* ^ : : . : ;
0.1
. ^ , . .
CC
0. 5
1. 5
2>
25
Period [s]
Composite: q=6.0
414
G$
3. 5
R/C: q=5.0
E2
m
co
*00
9,00
/ t25
ies.)
6025,
{es.)
50/60
7025^
2 020
(e.s.)
(e.s.)
.6016
""
6016
6016
6016
7016~r
~7~
6016
0 } 5St60
o
in
m
50'
025 (e.s.)
4025
(e.s.)
925v
7020
w
/ . //
,6025
7020
7020
8020
50 20
, / / j i i 8 f
Ln
7 025.
2020
(e.s.)
7025^
2028
r~t
4016
2020 ^
, 50/60
6025
(e.s.)
9,00
50/60
425(e.s.)
"6025
(as.)
50/60
+50+
,9025
925x
7020
7020
,7025
V
7020
5020
I60/60
o
LO
725 v
2028
.50/60
625(e.sJ
-- 9025
(e.s.)
7025'
(e.s.)
7025+/
2028
each
side
en
H025
(e.s.)
925v
7~
7020
,7025
7020
7""
6025
LT
025
eqch
. side
m'
d)
OJ
cu
cu
9.00
9,00
9.00
1
84*8/10
(D 84*8/10
18*8/15
18*8/10
@|12*8/10
o
LD
m"
o
t
60*8/10, 1112*10/10
82*8/10
12*10/10||
62*6/10
32*8/10
[34*8/10
en
46
'10010/10
15
Ln
2r^[
84*10/10
20*10/15
84*10/10
20*10/15
[19*10/15
co
Ln
in
84*10/10
84*10/10
s
JL.2
m
4k
20*10/15
20*10/15|
LTl
Sr
Interior transverse stirrups

ot columns not included !
|19*10/15
46
ILL
CU
o
Ln
15
ILL.
rn
ui
Interior ColumnsCross Sections
. f t
4 0 25
(e.s.)
Second Story and above
6 0 25
(e.s.)
First
4 0 25
Ground
(Top)
\ /
12
5^
Story
(G.S.)
Floor
0 12
ft
10 0 28
each side
Ground Floor
(Column B ase)
Exterior
00
ColumnsCross Sections
6 0 25
(e.s.)
Third Story
\ /
12
'
<r
Second Story
7 0 25
2 0 28
(e.s.)
First
7 0 25
2 0 28
each side
Ground Floor
2*. t
7 0 25
2 0 20
(e.s.)
Story
0 12
>
Project 2
Composite solution
E7
419
COMPOSITE
COMPOSITE STEEL DESIGN
REINFORCEMENT
b.
ro
o
Stirrups , end plates , ottier
Add, longitudinal reinforcement

soo
End Plates a 62) 180x35

3P0
900
IPE WO
J.
228 N
+ 2025 V
Continuity Plates'
297x95x20
&
8028
LTl
m'
IPE 500
<
S
' ^
202B (p,
+ 2025
End Plates 720 200 35
Continuity Rates 352 95 20
828
*K 10
IPE 500
15cm7m
Doubler Plates ( 35272010
2<28
+ 2025
Doubler Plates
0 297x720x20
828
MO
4^28 + 4 10
"Bcrn'/m
ni
Continuity Plates t 398x95x20
IPE 500
2028 N
2025 <y
^ Doubler Plates &
420*720x10
8?$28
4^28 + 4<* 10
pri
U
m
00
For serviceability reasons
For fire design
Stirrups
8/150
IPE500
2 0 25
2 028
Stirrups
08/150
IPE 400
-2 025
2028
421
^_
/\
\
\
LTI
Ji'
_i.
/^
7 V
\
\
OBI
06
\
\
Nr*
"7
05"
^_
^d.
7~
7 \
09
OS 4 /
422
10
Project 2
Synthesis of quantities for composite solution
Slab:
47922 kg rebars
439 m3 concrete
Beams In x-direction:
36446 kg rolled sections
4713 kg rebars
29 m3 concrete
Beams In y-direction:
2160 kg rebars
13 m3 concrete
Columns:
6838 kg rebars
30 m3 concrete
Total:
61633 kg rebars
511 m3 concrete
E11
423
Synthesis of quantities for R/C solution
Slab:
32295 kg rebars
436 m3 concrete
18898 kg rebars
87 m3 concrete
Beams In y-dlrectlon:
8808 kg rebars
37 m3 concrete
Columns R to R+2:
10790 kg rebars
29 m3 concrete
Columns R+2 to R+7:
23333 kg rebars
65 m3 concrete
Total:
94124 kg rebars
654 m3 concrete
424
E12
Project 2
Synthesis of quantities for composite solution
Slab:
47922 kg rebars
439 m3 concrete
4713 kg rebars
29 m3 concrete
Beams in y-direction:
2160 kg rebars
13 m3 concrete
Columns:
6838 kg rebars
30 m3 concrete
Total:
61633 kg rebars
511 m3 concrete
E13
425
Synthesis of quantities for R/C solution
Slab:
32295 kg rebars
436 m3 concrete
Beams in x-direction:
18898 kg rebars
87 m3 concrete
Beams in y-direction:
8808 kg rebars
37 m3 concrete
Columns R to R+2:
10790 kg rebars
29 m3 concrete
Columns R+2 to R+7:

23333 kg rebars
65 m3 concrete
Total:
94124 kg rebars
654 m3 concrete
426
E14
STRUCTURAL STEEL RESEARCH REPORTS

established by
RPS DEPARTEMENT / ARBED RECHERCHES
101] Grardy J.C. .Schleich J.B.; Elasto Plastic Behaviour of Steel Frames with SemiRigid
Connections / NORDIC STEEL COLLOQUIUM on Research and Development within The
Field of steel Construction; Odense, Denmark ,911 September 1991, RPS Report No 101/91.
102] Grardy J.C ., Schleich J.B.;SemiRigid Action in Steel Frames Structures / CEC agreement
No 7210SA / 507 ; Draft of Final Report, November 1991, RPS Report No 102/91.
103] Ppin R.,Schleich J.B.; Seismic Resistance of Composite Structures, SRCS / CEC agreement
No 7210SA / 506 ; Draft of Final Report, November 1991, RPS Report No 103/91.
104] Chantrain Ph.,Schleich J.B.; Interaction Diagrams between Axial Load and Bending
Moment M for Columns submitted to Buckling / CEC agreement No 7210SA / 510 ; Draft of
Final Report, November 1991, RPS Report No 104/91.
105] Schaumann P., Steffen .; Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuch Nr. 1
Einstegiger Verbundtrger / HRA, Bochum, Juli 1990, HRA Bericht A 89199, RPS Report No
105/90.
106] Schaumann P., Steffen .; Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuch Nr. 2
Realistischer Verbundbrckentrger / HRA, Bochum, November 1991, HRA Bericht
A 891992, RPS Report No 106/91.
107] Bruis ., Wang J.P. ; Composite Bridges with Hot Rolled Beams in High Strength Steel
Fe E 460 , and Spans up to 50 m / Service Ponts et Charpentes, Universit de Lige; Lige,
November 1991, RPS Report No 107/91.
108] Schleich J.B., Witry .; Acier HLE pour Ponts Mixtes Portes Moyennes de 20 50 m /
Journe Sidrurgique ATS 1991; Paris, 4 et 5 dcembre 1991, RPS Report No 108/91.
109] Schaumann , Steffen .; Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuch Nr. 5
Haupttrgerstoss mit Stahlbetonauflagerquertrger / HRA, Bochum, Januar 1992, HRA
Bericht A 90232A, RPS Report No 109/92.
110] Schaumann P, Schleich J.B., Kulka H., Tilmanns H.; Verbundbrcken unter Verwendung
von Walztrgern / Zusammenstellung der Vortrge anlsslich des Seminars
"Verbundbrckentag" am 12.09.90 an der Ruhruniversitt Bochum, RPS Report No 110/92.
I l l ] Schaumann P., Steffen .; Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuche Nr. 3 u. 4
Haupttrgerstoss mit geschraubten Steglaschen / HRA, Bochum 1992, HRA Bericht 90232B,
RPS Report No 111/92.
112] Schleich J.B., Witry .; Neues Konzept fr einfache Verbundbrcken mit Spannweiten von
20 bis 50 m / IX. Leipziger MetallbauKolloquium; Leipzig, 27. Mrz 1992, RPS Report
No 112/92.
113] Bergmann R., Kindmann R.; Auswertung der Versuche zum Tragverhalten von
Verbundprofilen mit ausbetonierten Kammern; Verbundsttzen / Ruhruniversitt
Bochum, Bericht No 9201, Februar 1992, RPS Report No 113/92.
114] Bergmann R., Kindmann R.; Auswertung der Versuche zum Tragverhalten von
Verbundprofilen mit ausbetonierten Kammern; Verbundtrger / Ruhruniversitt
Bochum, Bericht No 9202, Mrz 1992, RPS Report No 114/92.
115] Schleich J.B., Wippel H., Witry .; Untersuchungen an stegparallel versteiften
Rahmenknoten, ausgefhrt aus dickflanschigen hochfesten Walzprofilen . Entwurf
hochbelasteter Vierendeeltrger im Rahmen des Neubaus des Zentrums fr Kunst und
Medientechnologie ( ZKM ), Karlsruhe / RPS Report No 115/92.
116] Chantrain Ph., Becker ., Schleich J.B.; Behaviour of HIST AR hotrolled profiles in the
steel construction Tests / RPS Report No 116/91.
427
For up-to-date information on

European Community research
consult
CORDIS
The Community Research
and Development
Information Service
CORDIS is an on-line service set up under the VALUE programme to give quick and easy
access to information on European Community research programmes.
The CORDIS service is at present offered free-of-charge by the European Commission Host
Organisation (ECHO). A menu-based interface makes CORDIS simple to use even if you are
not familiar with on-line information services. For experienced users, the standard Common
Command Language (CCL) method of extracting data is also available.
CORDIS comprises eight databases:
RTD-News: short announcements of Calls for Proposals, publications and events in the
R&D field
RTD-Programmes: details of all EC programmes in R&D and related areas
RTD-Projects: containing 14,000 entries on individual activities within the programmes
RTD-Publications: bibliographic details and summaries of more than 50,000 scientific
and technical publications arising from EC activities
RTD-Results: provides valuable leads and hot tips on prototypes ready for industrial
exploitation and areas of research ripe for collaboration
RTD-Comdocuments: details of Commission communications to the Council of Ministers
and the European Parliament on research topics
RTD-Acronyms: explains the thousands of acronyms and abbreviations current in the
Community research area
RTD-Partners: helps bring organisations and research centres together for collaboration
on project proposals, exploitation of results, or marketing agreements.
For more information and CORDIS registration forms, contact
ECHO Customer Service
CORDIS Operations
BP 2373
L-1023 Luxembourg
Tel,: (+352) 34 98 11 Fax: (+352) 34 98 12 34
If you are already an ECHO user, please indicate your customer number.
European Communities Commission

EUR 14428 Properties and service performance
Seismic resistance of composite structures SRCS
J.B. Schleich, R. Pepin
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
1992 XII, 435 pp., num. tab., fig. 21.0 29.7 cm
Technical steel research series
ISBN 928264667X
Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: ECU 45
The first period of this research was devoted to the realization of nearly
quasistatic cyclic 50 tests on fullsized composite specimen which may
be divided into four series:
Series
Series
Series
Series
1 : tests on Tshaped exterior columns/beam joints;

2 : tests on crossshaped interior columns/beam joints;
3: tests on complete frames;
4: partial tests on different elements.
During each of these series different types of connections were analysed.

As the series were realized successively, the specimens could be continu
ously improved. Several tests realized in Series 3 are among the biggest
ones ever realized in Europe.
A second period allowed to develop a numerical code, which can simulate
concrete structures under seismic action by taking into account geomet
rical nonlinearities as well as the elastoplastic behaviour of steel and
the deterioration of concrete.
The present research showed that it is interesting to use composite struc
tures in earthquakeprone zones, since
concrete increases the resistance by about 50% in the elastic field;
concrete increases the stiffness;
concrete largely prevents local buckling;
concrete contributes to the shear panel behaviour;
after complete concrete crushing the structure always behaves like a
bare steel structure when submitted to very large displacements.
Venta y suscripciones Salg og abonnement Verkauf und Abonnement

Sales and subscriptions * Vente et abonnements Vendita e abbonamenti
Verkoop en abonnementen Venda e assinaturas
BELGIQUE / BELGI
Moniteur belge /
Belgisch Staatsblad
Rue de Louvain 42 / Leuvenseweg 42
B1000 Bruxelles / 100 Brussel
Tl. (02)512 00 26
Fax (02) 511 01 84
Autres distributeurs /
Overige verkooppunten
Librairie e u r o p e n n e /
Europese boekhandel
Rue d e la Loi 244/Wetstraat 244
B1040 Bruxelles / B1040 Brussel
Tl. (02) 231 04 35
Fax (02) 735 08 60
J e a n De Lannoy
Avenue du Roi 202 /Koningslaan 202
B1060 B r u x e l l e s / B 1 0 6 0 Brussel
Tl. (02) 538 51 69
Tlex 63220 U N B O O K
Fax (02) 538 08 41
Document delivery:
Credoc
Rue d e la Montagne 34 / Bergstraat 34
Bte 11 / Bus 11
B1000 Bruxelles / B1000 Brussel
Tl. (02) 511 69 41
Fax (02) 513 31 95
DANMARK
J . H. Schultz Information A / S
Herstedvang 1012
DK2620 Albertslund
Tlf. (45) 43 63 23 00
Fax (Sales) (45) 43 63 19 69
Fax (Management) (45) 43 63 19 49
FRANCE
SUOMI
TRKIYE
Journal officiel
Service des publications
des Communauts europennes
26, rue Desaix
F75727 Paris Cedex 15
Tl. (1) 40 58 75 00
Fax (1) 40 58 77 00
Akateeminen Kirjakauppa
Keskuskatu 1
PO Box 128
SF00101 Helsinki
Tel. (0) 121 41
Fax (0) 121 44 41
Pres Gazete Kitap Dergi

Pazariama Dagitim Ticaret ve sanayi
A
Narlibahe Sokak N. 15
IstanbulCagaloglu
Tel. (1) 520 92 96 528 55 66
Fax 520 64 57
Telex 23822 DSVOTR
NORGE
IRELAND
Government
45 Harcourt
Dublin 2
Tel. (1) 61 31
Fax (1) 78 06
Supplies Agency
Road
11
45
Tel. (02 21) 20 290

Telex ANZEIGER BONN 8 882 595
Fax 2 02 92 78
ROY International
PO Box 13056
41 Mishmar Hayarden Street
Tel Aviv 61130
Tel. 3 496 108
Fax 3 544 60 39
SVERIGE
ITALIA
Licosa SpA
Via Duca di Calabria, 1/1
Casella postale 552
150125 Firenze
Tel. (055) 64 54 15
Fax 64 12 57
Telex 570466 LICOSA I
GRANDDUCH DE LUXEMBOURG
Messageries Paul Kraus
1 1 , rue Christophe Plantin
L2339 Luxembourg
Tl. 499 88 88
Tlex 2515
Fax 499 88 84 44
DEUTSCHLAND
Bundesanzeiger Verlag
Breite Strae
Postfach 10 80 06
DW5000 Kln 1
Narvesen information center

Bertrand Narvesens vei 2
PO Box 6125 Etterstad
N0602 Oslo 6
Tel. (2) 57 33 00
Telex 79668 NIC
Fax (2) 68 19 01
BTJ
Tryck Traktorwgen 13
S222 60 Lund
Tel. (046) 18 00 00
Fax (046) 18 01 25
CANADA
Renouf Publishing C o . Ltd
Mail orders Head Office:
1294 Algoma Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1B 3W8
Tel. (613) 741 43 33
Fax (613) 741 54 39
Telex 0534783
SCHWEIZ / SUISSE / SVIZZERA

OSEC
Stampfenbachstrae 85
CH8035 Zrich
Tel. (01)365 54 49
Fax (01) 365 54 11
Ottawa Store:
61 Sparks Street
Tel. (613) 238 89 85
Toronto Store:
211 Yonge Street
Tel. ( 4 1 6 ) 3 6 3 31 71
CESKOSLOVENSKO
NIS
Havelkova 22
13000 Praha 3
Tel. (02) 235 84 46
Fax 422264775
NEDERLAND
MAGYARORSZG
S D U Overheidsinformatie
Externe Fondsen
Postbus 20014
2500 EA 'sGravenhage
Tel. (070) 37 89 911
Fax (070) 34 75 778
EuroInfoService
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Pf. 1271
H1464 Budapest
Tel./Fax(1) 111 60 61/111 62 16
AUSTRALIA
POLSKA
Hunter Publications
58A Gipps Street
Collingwood
Victoria 3066
Tel. (3)417 5361
Fax (3)419 7154
Business Foundation
GREECE/
G.C. Eleftheroudakis SA
International Bookstore
Nikis Street 4
GR10563 Athens
Tel. (01) 322 63 23
Telex 219410 ELEF
Fax 323 98 21
ESPANA
Boletfn Oficial del Estado
Trafalgar, 2 9
E28071 Madrid
Tel. (91)538 22 95
Fax (91)538 23 49
MundiPrensa Libros, SA
Castell, 37
E28001 Madrid
Tel. (91) 431 33 99 (Libros)
431 32 22 (Suscripciones)
435 36 37 (Direccin)
Tlex 49370MPLIE
Fax (91) 575 39 98
Sucursal:
Librera Internacional AEDOS
Consejo de Ciento, 391
E08009 Barcelona
Tel. (93) 488 34 92
Fax (93) 487 76 59
Llibreria de la Generalitat
de Catalunya
Rambla dels Estudis, 118 (Palau Moja)
E08002 Barcelona
Tel. (93) 302 68 35
302 64 62
Fax (93) 302 12 99
PORTUGAL
Imprensa Nacional
Casa d a Moeda. EP
Rua D. Francisco Manuel d e Melo, 5
P1092 Lisboa Codex
UNIPUB
4611 F Assembly Drive
Lanham, M D 207064391
Tel. Toll Free (800) 274 4888
Fax (301) 459 0056
ul. Krucza 38/42

00512 Warszawa
Tel. (22) 21 99 93. 6282882
International Fax&Phone
(039) 120077
Tel. (01)69 34 14
ROUMANIE
JAPAN
Distribuidora d e Livros
Bertrand, Ld."
Grupo B ertrand, SA
Rua das Terras d o s Vales, 4A
Apartado 37
P2700 Amadora Codex
Tel. (01) 49 59 050
Telex 15798 BERDIS
Fax 49 60 255
Euromedia
65, Strada Dionisie Lupu
70184 Bucuresti
Tel./Fax 0 12 96 46
Kinokuniya Company Ltd

177 Sh njuku 3Chome
Shinjukuku
Tokyo 16091
Tel. (03) 34390121
BULGARIE
Journal Department
PO Box 55 Chitose
Tokyo 156
Tel. (03)34390124
UNITED KINGDOM
HIVISO B ooks (Agency section)
H M S O Publications Centre
51 Nine Elms Lane
London SW8 5DR
Tel. (071) 873 9090
Fax 873 8463
Telex 29 71 138
STERREICH
Manz'sche Verlags
und Universittsbuchhandlung
Kohlmarkt 16
A1014 Wien
Tel. (0222)531 610
Telex 112 500 B O X A
Fax (0222) 531 6139
D.J.B.
59, bd Vitocha
1000 Sofia
Tel./Fax 2 810158
RUSSIA
SINGAPORE
C C E C (Centre for Cooperation with

the European Communities)
9. Prospekt 60let Oktyabria
117312 M o s c o w
Tel. 095 135 52 87
Fax 095 420 21 44
Legal Library Services Ltd

STK Agency
Robinson Road
PO Box 1817
Singapore 9036
CYPRUS
AUTRES PAYS
OTHER COUNTRIES
ANDERE LANDER
Cyprus C h a m b e r of C o m m e r c e and
Industry
Chamber Building
38 Grivas Dhigenis Ave
3 Deligiorgis Street
PO Box 1455
Nicosia
Tel. (2)449500/462312
Fax (2) 458630
Illllililllill'ill
Office des publications officielles

des Communauts europennes
2, rue Mercier
L2985 Luxembourg
Tl. 499 28 1
Tlex PUBOF LU 1324 b
Fax 48 85 73/48 68 17
"426709
41
Ui
NOTICE TO THE READER

All scientific and technical reports published by the Commission of the European Communities
are announced in the monthly periodical 'euro abstracts'. For subscription (1 year: ECU 110)
please write to the address below.
tro
00
Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: ECU 45

* * *
OFFICE FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS
* o p * OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

L-2985 Luxembourg
ISBN
^-a^-Hhhl-X

Cgna14428enc 001 PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Cgna14428enc 001 PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Commission of the European Communities

technical steel researc

Seismic resistance of composite structures

Properties and service performance

Seismic resistance of composite structures

PARL EURCP. Dbioth.

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1992

Seismic Resistance of Composite Structures

1 st Scheduled Completion Date: 30.06.1990

Service Ponts et Charpentes, Universit de Lige

Lehrstuhl fr Stahlbau, RWTH Aachen (D)

Research: "SEISMIC RE SISTANCE OF COMPOSITE STRUCTURES"

tests on T-shaped exterior column/beam joints

tests on cross-shaped interior columns/beam joints

tests on complete frames

partial tests on different elements

"LA RE SISTANCE SISMIQUE DE S CONSTRUCTIONS

Contrat 7210-SA/506 C.C.E. - ARBED

essais sur joints poutre/colonne extrieure en forme de

essais sur joints poutre/colonne intrieure en forme de

essais sur portiques entiers

essais sur divers sous-assemblages.

Forschungsauftrag 7210SA/506 K.EG. ARBED

Versuche an vollstndigen Rahmensystemen

Versuche an verschiedenen zustzlichen Anschlssen

Whrend jeder dieser Reihen wurden verschiedene Anschlusstypen analysiert. Da

der Beton die Tragfhigkeit der Struktur um bis zu 50% im elastischen

6.2.3. Shear forces

Recommendations to improve ECCS document 45

Appendix Test report of the Lige laboratory

Appendix C Test report of the Wuppertal laboratory

Appendix D Test report of the Darmstadt laboratory

Appendix E Material lists from comparing concrete to

1.1. General reflexions

Figure 1.1: Human losses due to earthquakes

1.2. Aims of the research project

Figure 2.1: AF-column

Among the various types of composite

18 tests on exterior beam-to-column joints formed by a

20 tests on interior beam-to-column joints formed by a

10 tests on more complex structures like frames (figure

This choice was made for the following reasons:

Series 3 at Wupp3 rial

Figure 2.4: Different types of frames tested in series 3

Figure 2.5: Elements tested in series 4

3.1. Selection of the joints to test

Specimen of series 1 during testing

Fully rigid design with column stiffeners

Slightly modified joint

PVC channel steel channel stiffeners

Usual AFjoint with light improvements

- Welds to be realized on site

- Welded rigid joint (fillet welds)

- Completely new type of joint according to the

3.2. Testing installation and measurement devices

Figure 3.1: Main components of the testing set-up

Figure 3.2: Out-of-plane bracing of the set-up

Figure 3.3: Basic equipment of series 1 set-up

Plastic hinge deformation

Sheared panel deformation

Figure 3.6: Terms of deformation

3.3. Major results