Research On Rapidly Constructed CFT Bridge Piers Suitable For Seismic Design

TCLEE 2009: Lifeline Earthquake Engineering in a Multihazard Environment ©2009 ASCE 24
Research on Rapidly Constructed CFT Bridge Piers Suitable for Seismic Design
Charles W. Roeder1 and Dawn E. Lehman2

1
Professor of Civil Engineering, 233B More Hall, University of Washington, Seattle,
WA 98195-2700, croeder@u.washington.edu
2
Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, 214More Hall, University of Washington,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DEAKIN UNIVERSITY on 08/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Seattle, WA 98195-2700
ABSTRACT
Concrete filled steel tubes (CFT) can result in rapid and economical
construction. The steel tube serves as formwork and reinforcement to the concrete
fill. The fill increases compressive strength and stiffness, delays and restrains local
buckling of the tube, and enhances ductility and resistance if composite action is
achieved. CFT bridge piers can achieve greater strength and stiffness for a given
quantity of material than normal reinforced concrete pier construction. Research is in
progress to develop a practical and economical connection of circular CFT bridge
piers to their footing or pile cap that provides good seismic performance. The
connection is quite simple and does not require any reinforcement in the tube or
dowels connecting the tube to the footing. Two variations of this connection have
been developed and are discussed. Twelve large-scale experiments and limited
inelastic analyses have documented the connection performance. This work shows
that the CFT pier and the connection can develop the full capacity of the composite
element, and provide greater ductility under inelastic seismic deformation than
achieved by reinforced concrete piers.
INTRODUCTION
Concrete filled steel tubes (CFT) permit economical and practical structures.
They can be rapidly constructed, because the steel tube serves as formwork and
reinforcement to the concrete fill. The fill delays and restrains local buckling, and it
enhances ductility, stiffness and resistance through composite action. CFT may be
used as rectangular or circular members, but circular CFT provides better
performance than rectangular CFT, because the circular tube confines the concrete,
increases bond stress between steel and concrete, and reduces susceptibility to local
buckling (Roeder et al. 2009). However, rectangular CFT is easier to connect to
other structural members, and this has been a limiting factor for use of circular CFT
in practice.
The steel tube reinforces the composite member at the optimal location, and
so CFT piers require significantly smaller diameter with less material to achieve a
given resistance level than reinforced concrete piers as shown in Figure 1. Hence,
CFT results in lighter structures and smaller seismic design forces. In Fig.1, the CFT
bridge pier has 27% lighter weight, correspondingly less material, and smaller mass
than a comparable reinforced concrete bridge pier, but it has equal or greater
TCLEE 2009
resistance than the heavier reinforced concrete pier. The CFT pier may have
significantly greater ductility and better inelastic seismic performance. Further,
experiments show considerable reserve resistance with circular CFT beyond that
suggested in the design models of Fig. 1.
Figure 1 - Resistance of CFT and larger reinforced concrete pier compared
Circular CFT bridge piers offer excellent strength, stiffness, ductility, and
inelastic performance. However, as noted earlier, circular CFT is more difficult to
connect to other structural elements. A simple and economical CFT cast-in-place
pier-to-footing connection that permits rapid construction has been developed to
partially overcome this obstacle.
PROPOSED CONNECTION
Several categories of CFT pier to foundation connections have been proposed

or investigated. These include:
• Embedded column connections (Hsu and Lin, 2003; Hitaka, Suita, and Kato,
2004).
• A variation of embedded connection where the steel tube is welded to
channels, which are embedded into the footing (Marson and Bruneau, 2004).
• Variations on the steel base plate connection (Hitaka, Suita, and Kato 2004).
• Dowel connections, which rely on reinforcing bars within the tube to transfer
forces and bending moments to the foundation (Kadoya et al. 2005, Morino et
al. 2003, Roeder et al., 2005).
Figure 2 illustrates the new CFT pier-to-foundation connection proposed for
rapid construction of bridge piers (Kingsley et al. 2005). It is a combination of the
embedded and the base plate connections. However, it employs an annular ring that
is welded to the base of the steel tube with a complete joint penetration (CJP) weld as
shown in the photo of Fig. 3 rather than a complete base plate. The open hole in the
annular ring permits continuity and direct bearing of the concrete fill of the CFT on
the foundation and economy and efficiency not afforded by full plate connections.
The ring interlocks the CFT pier element with the foundation and the concrete fill,
since it projects outside the tube and penetrates slightly into the tube. The annular
ring also provides temporary attachment for the tube during placement of the
concrete. The tube has no internal reinforcement, and no dowels or reinforcement
TCLEE 2009
penetrate from the tube into the foundation. However, the footing is reinforced as
normally required for the foundation design.
Figure 2. Proposed CFT pier foundation connections, a) Embedded connection,

b) Recessed connection.
Figure 3. Annular ring

Construction is accomplished by one of two options: embedded or recessed
connection methods. The embedded connection is constructed by casting the footing
or pile cap in two lifts as shown in Fig.2a. First, the lower lift is cast, and the tube is
attached temporarily by anchor bolts. The remainder of the footing and concrete fill
of the tube are then cast in a second lift. The footing for the recessed connection
shown in Fig. 2b is cast to its full depth with a recess, which has an inside diameter
that is slightly larger than the annular ring. The recess is formed with a light gauge
corrugated metal pipe. The tube is placed in the recess, and the recess is filled with
high strength fiber reinforced grout. Low shrinkage, self-consolidating concrete is
used for the fill.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
Twelve large-scale specimens were tested to evaluate the proposed

connections (Kingsley 2005, Williams 2007, and Chronister 2008) as shown in Table
TCLEE 2009
1. Most tests examined the behavior under axial compression and cyclic lateral load
simulating inelastic seismic behavior, but a few tests were compression only to
evaluate punching shear resistance of the CFT pier and the footing. All specimens
approximately simulate a half-scale bridge pier, and steel tubes were 508 mm by 6.4-
mm (20 in. by 0.25 in) in outside diameter and wall thickness, respectively, with a
diameter-to-thickness ratio, D/t, of 80 and a specified yield strength, Fy, of 490 MPa
(70 ksi).
Table 1. Experimental Parameters and Material Properties
Max. Max.
f’c
le D Specific Goals Drift Load Failure Mode
(MPa)
(kN)
Embedded w/light 8.5% 581 Cone Pullout
I 0.6 75.8
foundation reinforcement
Embedded w/light 9.5% 599 Cone Pullout
II 0.6 75.8
reinforcement
Embedded 8.0% 735 Ductile Tearing of
III 0.9 69.2
Tube
IV 0.6 Recessed 69.2 7.8% 618 Cone Pullout
V 0.9 Embedded 77.8 9.0% 749 Ductile Tearing
VI 0.75 Recessed 82.0 9.6% 770 Ductile Tearing
Recessed Connection NA 3413 Punching shear
VII 0.75 63.9
w/Punching Test Comp w/225mm depth
Recessed Connection NA 3044 Cyclic Punching
VIII 0.75 64.6
w/Cyclic Punching Test Comp w/225mm depth
Recessed Connection 8.5% 770 Ductile Tearing
IX 0.9 68.9
w/Galvanized tube
Recessed Connection 10.5% 797 Ductile Tearing
X 0.9 w/Galvanized Tube & 67.4
Near Fault Deformation
Recessed Connection - 10.4% 743 Ductile Tearing
XI 0.9 Increased Axial Load 63.9
(2737 kN)
Recessed Connection - 9.5% 788 Ductile Tearing
XII 0.9 Increased Axial Load 68.8
(3649 kN)
The specimens were tested in a self-reacting load frame, which was placed
under a 10.7MN (2400 kips) universal testing machine, which applied vertical gravity
load to the specimen as shown in Fig. 4. Most specimens were subjected to a
TCLEE 2009
compressive load of 1,824 kN (410 kips), which is approximately 10% of the gross
capacity of the CFT members, but larger loads were sometimes applied as shown in
Table 1. The compressive load is applied through a dimpled, lubricated
Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) sliding surface on a spherical bearing and a #8 mirror
finish stainless steel mating surface. Therefore, P-δ effects are directly simulated in
the test, and friction of the PTFE surface has minimal effect on specimen
performance. A 979-kN (220 kip) horizontal actuator applied the cyclic lateral loads.
Lateral loads were applied 1.86m (6 ft) above the surface of the footing. The
displacement history for most tests was based on ATC-24 protocol (ATC 1992), but
Specimen X was subject to a near fault variation of this deformation history.
Nonlinear analyses were used to estimate the yield drift required by ATC 24.
Figure 4 - Test setup

Figure 5 shows the test specimen geometry and reinforcement. The annular
ring was 160-mm by 6.4-mm (6.25 in by 0.25in) in width and thickness, and it
projected 102 mm (4 in) outside and 51 mm (2 in) inside of the tube. The ring was
welded to the tube with a CJP weld of matching metal and a weld process meeting the
AISC demand critical weld criteria (AISC 2005b). The embedment depth of the tube
varied from specimen to specimen to establish the embedment required for good
system performance. Footing dimensions were selected to permit full transfer of the
column forces and to limit the effect of the footing size on the connection mode of
failure. Reinforcement simulated typical bridge foundation footings. For all
specimens, flexural reinforcement in the longitudinal plane of bending at the top and
the bottom of the footing consisted of #6 (19-mm diameter) bars spaced at 102 mm (4
in) on center, but the shear and transverse flexural direction varied from specimen to
specimen. Specimens 1 and 2 had no additional supplemental shear ties, and the
transverse flexural reinforcement consisted of lighter bars at greater spacing (#4 bars
TCLEE 2009
and 228.6mm) as shown in the figure. All remaining specimens had transverse
flexural reinforcement consisting of #6 bars at 102 mm and #3 vertical shear ties
detailed with standard seismic hooks. To ensure development of the longitudinal
reinforcement, the longitudinal bars were bent as shown in Fig. 5.
Figure 5. Geometry and reinforcement of CFT specimens
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Table 1 provides an overview of the experimental results, but the results of 3

separate tests are summarized to illustrate the variability in the test results.
800
Horizontal Load (kN)
400
-400
-800
-10% -8% -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Column Drift Ratio
Figure 6. Specimen I Load-Drift Response Figure 7. Damage to Specimen I
Specimen I was an embedded connection designed with a shallow embedment
depth (.6D). Before achieving a 0.3% drift, foundation cracking initiated at the pier-
footing interface and spread from the column base, parallel and perpendicular to the
direction of loading. Crack widths grew larger in subsequent cycles at the same and
increasing drift levels. The maximum horizontal load of 580.5 kN (130.4 kips) was
achieved at 2.4% drift and the resistance deteriorated rapidly with drift levels as
shown in Fig. 6. The steel tube yielded but did not develop the full plastic capacity of
the composite CFT section. Some cracks were more than 5-mm (0.2 in) wide at
approximately 4% drift levels. At this drift level, the footing concrete was severely
TCLEE 2009
damaged and began to separate from the footing. Loading was terminated at 8% drift
with the final damage state shown in Fig. 7.
800
Horizontal Load (kN)

400
-400
-800
-10% -8% -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Column Drift Ratio
Figure 8. Specimen III Load-Deflection Response
a) 4% Drift b) End of Test

Figure 9. Damage to Specimen III at high drift levels
Specimen III was an embedded connection with greater embedment depth
(.9D) than Specimen I. At very low drift levels, the response of Specimen III was
similar to Specimen I with small foundation crack forming at 0.5% drift. However,
these foundation cracks remained small and less widely distributed throughout the
test. Tensile yielding of the tube occurred at 1.3% drift with at a horizontal load of
597.4 kN (123 kips). The maximum measured horizontal load was 734.5 kN (165
kips) and occurred at 2.4% drift as shown in Fig. 8. Specimen III developed the full
plastic capacity of the CFT member and exceeded the resistance of Specimen 1 by
26%. Very little deterioration of resistance is noted for Specimen III, and the
apparent deterioration is primarily due to the P-δ effects rather than material
deterioration of the specimen. At 4% drift, local buckling of the tube was clearly
visible as shown in Fig. 9a. By 6% drift, local buckling induced large cyclic local
strains to the steel and these local strains led to initiation of ductile tearing around the
circumference of the tube at the peak of the bulge. The concrete fill in the buckled
region of the tube crushed at this point. The test was terminated at 8% drift due to
TCLEE 2009
significant tearing around the perimeter of the steel tube at the local buckled region as
shown in Fig. 9b. Specimen III had greater resistance, energy dissipation, and drift
capacity than Specimen I, and sustained only minimal damage to the footing.
Specimen VI is a recessed connection with a 0.75D embedment depth. Its
lateral force-story drift hysteretic behavior is shown in Fig. 10. At very low drift
levels, the behavior of Specimen VI was similar to Specimens I and III, since small
foundation cracks initiated at 0.85% drift. However, the cracks remained much
smaller and less widely distributed at larger deformations than for Specimen I, and
the corrugated steel pipe changed the pattern and limited foundation cracking with
increased deformation levels. Foundation cracking was ultimately somewhat more
severe for Specimen VI than for Specimen III, because of the shallower embedment
depth. The corrugated pipe uplifted approximately 7.5mm at approximately 2.5%
drift, but little or no increase in this uplift was noted at increased amplitude cycles.
Yielding of the tube initiated at an approximate lateral load of 543 kN (122 kips) at
1.2% drift, and visible local buckling of the steel tube was observed at 3.1% drift.
Initiation of tearing at the highly strained peak of the buckle was first observed at 6%
drift, and tearing increased with repeated cycles and increasing deformation. The tear
effectively encompassed the entire perimeter of the tube by 8.9% drift. The maximum
horizontal load on the tube was a 770kN (173 kips) and it occurred at approximately
7% drift angle.
Figure 10. Specimen VI Load Deflection Response

Table 1 shows that additional tests were performed to evaluate:
• punching shear and cone pullout resistance,
• differences between embedded and recessed connections,
• effect of embedment depth,
• effect of galvanization as a corrosion control measure,
• effect of increased axial load on the connection performance, and
• effect of a near fault seismic deformation history.
TCLEE 2009
While many of these issues are not discussed, it can be seen the both connection
options consistently develop substantial inelastic deformation capacity and the full
ultimate resistance of the composite section if the embedment depth is adequate. For
the high strength steel tubes used in this study, the required embedment depth for
maxim performance is in the range of 0.75D to 0.9D. This depth is economical and
practical for many applications.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Circular CFT bridge piers are practical, efficient, and economical, and they
permit rapid field construction. The connection of the pier to the foundation is
critical in ensuring good system performance, and a simple CFT pier-to-foundation
connection is proposed. The connection consists of an annular ring (or flange)
welded to the base of the tube and embedded directly into the foundation. The
connection may be a directly embedded connection or a recessed, grouted connection
detail, which permits placement of the tube after the concrete footing is cast.
The tube slenderness and yield strength are larger than currently permitted by
the AISC design provisions (AISC 2005a).
Twelve connections have been tested for a range of different connection
design details and loading conditions. The slender (D/t = 80) spiral welded tubes
were manufactured using a high-strength (490 MPa), vanadium-alloy steel, and were
filled with a low-shrinkage, self-consolidating, high-strength (65 MPa) concrete.
The specimens simulated a half-scale bridge pier column. Embedment depths of 0.6
to 0.9 times the diameter of the tube were tested. Shear reinforcement was varied, but
the specimen without any shear reinforcement and lighter flexural reinforcement had
similar resistance, failure modes and deformation capacity than the specimen with
significant amounts of vertical shear reinforcement.
Specimens with the short (0.6 times the diameter) embedment depths had
significant foundation damage with cone pullout fractures of the concrete footing.
Specimens with more significant embedment depth (0.75D to 0.9D) developed the
full plastic, composite resistance of the CFT pier column and attained large inelastic
deformations prior to ultimate failure with little damage to the footing. Local
buckling of the thin wall tubes was first observable at drift levels of 3% to 4%. The
maximum lateral resistance of the connection occurred at drift levels slightly smaller
that the level where buckling was observed. For these greater embedment depths,
very little deterioration of resistance was noted, the little deterioration noted was
primarily due to the P-δ effect. After multiple cycles of severe buckling deformation
at drift levels larger than 6%, tears initiated in the highly strained region at peak of
the bulge. The tear grew around the perimeter of the buckled tube with multiple
cycles of increasing deformation, and ultimate failure of the tube was noted at drift
levels between 8% and 10.5%.
Specimens with 0.75D to 0.9D embedment depth achieved and retained the
full plastic moment capacity of the column despite exceeding the AISC D/t ratio limit
for the steel tube (AISC 2005a). This shows that composite action was fully
achieved. There are clear benefits to using stocky tubes in CFT construction, however
TCLEE 2009
this research also shows benefits of using more slender tubes for CFT piers, since the
reinforcement ratio in CFT is related to the tube slenderness and the resistance can be
developed with shorter embedment depth.
The test results indicate that the proposed annular-ring embedded connection
is effective and practical for both the embedded and the recessed connections.
Specimens with the longer embedment depth achieved drift capacities far in excess of
the maximum seismic design drifts without degradation of the system and minimal
damage to the footing, and this connection is appropriate for high seismic zones and
other extreme loading conditions. The “longer” embedment depths described in this
paper are significantly shorter than the many current design recommendations (for
example, 1.5D to 2D, by Morino et al., 2003, Hitaka, Suita, and Kato, 2004). The
proposed detail permits rapid construction with reduced labor requirements for
formwork and placement of reinforcement.
The behavior of this connection is expected to influenced by the D/t ratio, the
steel yield strength (Fy) and the relative embedment depth ratio, le D , because these
parameters determine the tension force demand. The axial load ratio and the
deformation of the footing can also influence the force transfer mechanism and
connection damage and failure modes. Design expressions for CFT columns and their
foundation connections must also be developed. As a result, further research on this
connection is required.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was sponsored by the Army Research Laboratory and was
accomplished under Cooperative Agreement Number DAAD19-03-2-0036. The
views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should
not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of
the Army Research Laboratory or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government is
authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes
notwithstanding any copyright notation heron. The authors gratefully acknowledge
the financial support of the Army Research Laboratory, and the advice and assistance
provided by Mr. Jon Tirpak, the Advanced Technology Institute and the Vanadium
Technology Partnership. Funding has been obtained for additional research through
the California Department of Transportation under agreement 59A0641 with Mr.
Peter S. Lee as the program manager. This support is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
AISC (2005a). "Specification for Structural Steel Buildings," American Institute of

Steel Construction, Chicago, Illinois.
AISC (2005b). "Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings," American
Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, Illinois.
ATC-24 (1992). "Guidelines for Testing Steel Components," Applied Technology
Council, Redwood City CA, 1992, 57 pp.
Chronister, Andrew (2008). " ," a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree
of Master of Science in Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle,
WA.
TCLEE 2009
Hitaka, T., Suita, K., and Kato, M. (2003) “CFT Column Base Design and Practice
in Japan,” Proceedings of the International Workshop on Steel and Concrete
Composite Construction (IWSCCC-2003), Report No. NCREE-03-026,
National Center for Research in Earthquake Engineering, Taipei, Taiwan, pgs.
281-290.
Hsu, H. and Lin, H. (2003) “Performance of Concrete-Filled Tube Base Connections
Under Repeated Loading,” Proceedings of the International Workshop on
Steel and Concrete Composite Construction (IWSCCC-2003), Report No.
NCREE-03-026, National Center for Research in Earthquake Engineering,

Taipei, Taiwan, pp. 291-299.
Kadoya, H., Kawaguchi, J., and Morino, S. (2005) “Experimental Study on Strength
and Stiffness of Bare Type CFT Column Base with Central Reinforcing
Bars”, Composite Construction in Steel and Concrete V, Ed. Roberto Leon
and Jörg Lange, United Engineering Foundation, Inc., July 2004.
Kingsley, Angela (2005) "Experimental and Analytical Investigation of Embedded
Column Base Connections for Concrete Filled High Strength Steel Tubes," a
thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Science in
Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Marson, J. and Bruneau, M. (2004) "Cyclic Testing of Concrete-Filled Circular Steel
Bridge Piers Having Encased Fixed-Base Detail," ASCE, Journal of Bridge
Engineering, Vol.9, No.1, pp.14-23.
Morino, S., Kawaguchi, J., Tsuji, A., and Kadoya, H. (2003) “Strength and Stiffness
of CFT Semi-Embedded Type Column Base,” Proceedings of ASSCCA 2003,
Sydney, Australia, A. A. Balkema, Sydney, Australia.
Roeder, C.W., Graff, R., Soderstrom, J. and Yoo, J.H. (2005) "Seismic Performance
of Pile-Wharf Connections," ASCE, Structural Engineering Journal, Vol.
132, No. 3, March, 2005, pgs 428-37.
Roeder, C.W., Lehman, D.E., and Thody, R., (2009) "Composite Action in CFT
Components and Connections," approved for publication, AISC, Engineering
Journal, Chicago, IL.
Williams, Travis (2007) "Experimental Investigation of High Strength Concrete
Filled Steel Tubes in Embedded Column Base Foundation Connections," a
thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Science in
Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
TCLEE 2009

Research On Rapidly Constructed CFT Bridge Piers Suitable For Seismic Design

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

Research On Rapidly Constructed CFT Bridge Piers Suitable For Seismic Design

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

TCLEE 2009: Lifeline Earthquake Engineering in a Multihazard Environment ©2009 ASCE 24

Charles W. Roeder1 and Dawn E. Lehman2

Figure 1 - Resistance of CFT and larger reinforced concrete pier compared

Several categories of CFT pier to foundation connections have been proposed

Figure 2. Proposed CFT pier foundation connections, a) Embedded connection,

Figure 3. Annular ring

Twelve large-scale specimens were tested to evaluate the proposed

Figure 4 - Test setup

Figure 5. Geometry and reinforcement of CFT specimens

Table 1 provides an overview of the experimental results, but the results of 3

Horizontal Load (kN)

a) 4% Drift b) End of Test

Figure 10. Specimen VI Load Deflection Response

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

AISC (2005a). "Specification for Structural Steel Buildings," American Institute of

NCREE-03-026, National Center for Research in Earthquake Engineering,

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi