Influence of different mechanical column-foundation connection devices on the seismic behaviour of precast structures

Dry-assembled precast concrete frame structures are typically made with dowel beam-to-column connections, which allow relative rotation along the beam direction. In the orthogonal direction the rotation of the beam is prevented but again the connections of the superimposed floor elements allow for relative rotation. All the ductility and energy dissipation demand in case of seismic action is therefore concentrated at the base of cantilever columns. Hence, the column-to-foundation connection plays a key role on the seismic performance of such structures. Mechanical connection devices, even if correctly designed for what concerns resistance, may affect the behaviour of the whole joint modifying the ductility capacity of the columns and their energy dissipation properties. An experimental campaign on different mechanical connection devices has been performed at Politecnico di Milano within the Safecast project (European programme FP7-SME-2007-2, Grant agreement No. 218417, 2009). The results of cyclic tests on full scale structural sub-assembly specimens are presented. Design rules are suggested for each of the tested connections on the basis of the experimental observations, and numerical analyses have been performed with hysteretic parameters calibrated on the experimental loops. The seismic performance of structures provided with those connections is investigated through a case study on a multi-storey precast building prototype, which has also been subject to full-scale pseudo-dynamic testing within the same research project at the European Laboratory of Structural Assessment of the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. The comparison of the results from the structure provided with the different studied connections clearly highlights how some solutions may lead to both reduction of ductility capacity and dissipation of energy, increasing the expected structural damage and the seismic risk.

[1]  M. Fardis,et al.  Designer's guide to EN 1998-1 and en 1998-5 Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance; general rules, seismic actions, design rules for buildings, foundations and retaining structures/ M.Fardis[et al.] , 2005 .

[2]  Graham H. Powell,et al.  Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Structures , 2008 .

[3]  G. Toniolo,et al.  Precast R.C. columns under cyclic loading : An experimental programme oriented to EC8 , 1998 .

[4]  T. Paulay,et al.  Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings , 1992 .

[5]  Peter Fajfar,et al.  THE N2 METHOD FOR THE SEISMIC DAMAGE ANALYSIS OF RC BUILDINGS , 1996 .

[6]  Negro Paolo,et al.  Design Guidelines for Connections of Precast Structures under Seismic Actions , 2012 .

[7]  Frieder Seible,et al.  PIVOT HYSTERESIS MODEL FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE MEMBERS , 1998 .

[8]  M. Sargin.  Stress-strain relationships for concrete and the analysis of structural concrete sections , 1971 .

[9]  Paolo Negro,et al.  Pseudodynamic Tests on a Full-Scale 3-Storey Precast Concrete Building: Global Response , 2013 .

[10]  F. Biondini,et al.  Pseudodynamic Tests and Numerical Simulations on a Full-Scale Prototype of a Multi-Storey Precast Structure , 2012 .

[11]  Viorel Popa,et al.  Experimental testing on emulative connections for precast columns using grouted corrugated steel sleeves , 2015, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[12]  John F. Stanton,et al.  An Overview of the PRESSS Five-Story Precast Test Building , 1999 .

[13]  Andrea Belleri,et al.  Seismic performance and retrofit of precast concrete grouted sleeve connections , 2012 .

[14]  C. Mazzotti,et al.  SEISMIC BEHAVOIUR OF GROUTED SLEEVE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN FOUNDATIONS AND PRECAST COLUMNS , 2014 .

[15]  G. Toniolo.  SAFECAST PROJECT: EUROPEAN RESEARCH ON SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF THE CONNECTIONS OF PRECAST STRUCTURES , 2014 .