Seismic performance of a 3D full‐scale high‐ductility steel–concrete composite moment‐resisting structure—Part I: Design and testing procedure

A multi-level pseudo-dynamic (PSD) seismic test programme was performed on a full-scale three-bay two-storey steel-concrete composite moment-resisting frame built with partially encased composite columns and partial-strength connections. The system was designed to provide strength and ductility for earthquake resistance with energy dissipation located in ductile components of beam-to-column joints including flexural yielding of beam end-plates and shear yielding of the column web panel zone. In addition, the response of the frame depending on the column base yielding was analysed. Firstly, the design of the test structure is presented in the paper, with particular emphasis on the ductile detailing of beam-to-column joints. Details of the construction of the test structure and the test set-up are also given. The paper then provides a description of the non-linear static and dynamic analytical studies that were carried out to preliminary assess the seismic performance of the test structure and establish a comprehensive multi-level PSD seismic test programme. The resulting test protocol included the application of a spectrum-compatible earthquake ground motion scaled to four different peak ground acceleration levels to reproduce an elastic response as well as serviceability, ultimate, and collapse limit state conditions, respectively. Severe damage to the building was finally induced by a cyclic test with stepwise increasing displacement amplitudes.

[1]  Achintya Haldar,et al.  Energy Dissipation at PR Frames under Seismic Loading , 2001 .

[2]  Stefano Caramelli,et al.  3D full-scale seismic testing of a steel-concrete composite building at ELSA , 2004 .

[3]  E. Gaylord,et al.  Design of Steel Structures , 1972 .

[4]  Fabio Ferrario,et al.  Non-linear analysis of the low-cycle fracture behaviour of isolated Tee stub connections , 2002 .

[5]  Andrzej Kijko,et al.  A probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Greece and the surrounding region including site-specific considerations , 2004 .

[6]  null null.  Design Guide for Partially Restrained Composite Connections , 1998 .

[7]  Ahmed Youssef Elghazouli.  Earthquake resistance of composite beam-columns , 1991 .

[8]  Adrian Ciutina,et al.  Seismic Response of Composite Structures Including Actual Behaviour of Beam-To-Column Joints , 2006 .

[9]  Adrian Ciutina,et al.  Seismic Performance of End-Plate Moment Resisting Composite Joints , 2006 .

[10]  Masayoshi Nakashima,et al.  Steel moment frames for earthquakes in United States and Japan , 2000 .

[11]  Roberto T. Leon,et al.  BIDIRECTIONAL TESTS ON PARTIALLY RESTRAINED, COMPOSITE BEAM-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS , 2004 .

[12]  Gregory G. Deierlein,et al.  Pseudo-dynamic test of full-scale rcs frame: Part I - Design, construction, testing , 2004 .

[13]  N. Null.  Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures , 2003 .

[14]  Julian J. Bommer,et al.  Derivation of design soil coefficients (S) and response spectral shapes for Eurocode 8 using the European Strong-Motion Database , 2002 .

[15]  Oreste S. Bursi,et al.  Non-linear analysis of steel–concrete composite frames with full and partial shear connection subjected to seismic loads , 2005 .

[16]  R. Clough,et al.  Dynamics Of Structures , 1975 .

[17]  H Krawinkler,et al.  Shear in Beam-Column Joints in Seismic Design of Steel Frames , 1978, Engineering Journal.

[18]  Gregory G. Deierlein,et al.  Pseudo-dynamic test of full-scale rcs frame: Part II–Analysis and design implications , 2004 .

[19]  L. Di Sarno,et al.  Inelastic response of composite steel and concrete base column connections , 2007 .

[20]  R. P. Johnson,et al.  Design of composite steel and concrete structures , 1993 .

[21]  André Plumier,et al.  Seismic behaviour and design of composite steel concrete structures , 2001 .

[22]  Oreste S. Bursi,et al.  Design, testing and analysis of high ductile partial-strength steel-concrete composite beam-to-column joints , 2005 .

[23]  Oreste S. Bursi,et al.  The analysis of the Generalized-α method for non-linear dynamic problems , 2002 .

[24]  Stefano Caramelli,et al.  Seismic design of beam-to-column connections for steel-concrete composite moment resisting frames , 2002 .

[25]  Robert Tremblay,et al.  Behaviour and modelling of partial‐strength beam‐to‐column composite joints for seismic applications , 2007 .

[26]  John B. Mander,et al.  Experimental & Analytical Study of Low-Cycle Fatigue Behavior of Semi-Rigid Top-and-Seat Angle Connections , 1994 .

[27]  Jean-Pierre Jaspart,et al.  Prefabricated composite beam-to-concrete filled tube or partially reinforced-concrete-encased column connections for severe seismic and fire loadings , 2008 .

[28]  David J. Wagg,et al.  Novel coupling Rosenbrock‐based algorithms for real‐time dynamic substructure testing , 2008 .

[29]  James A. Swanson,et al.  BOLTED STEEL CONNECTIONS: TESTS ON T-STUB COMPONENTS , 2000 .

[30]  J. Mander,et al.  Theoretical stress strain model for confined concrete , 1988 .

[31]  Robert Tremblay,et al.  Seismic performance of a 3D full‐scale high‐ductile steel–concrete composite moment‐resisting frame—Part II: Test results and analytical validation , 2008 .

[32]  Gaetano Manfredi,et al.  Ductility of composite beams under negative bending: an equivalence index for reinforcing steel classification , 2001 .