Inelastic response of composite steel and concrete base column connections

Abstract This paper assesses the experimental results of monotonic (pushover) tests carried out on partially encased composite steel–concrete columns connected to the foundation block through the traditional bolted steel end plate and an innovative socket type system. These tests show that the structural response of the traditional connection is significantly influenced by the behaviour of the anchorage bolts. The latter cause large fixed end rotations and possess limited energy dissipation. Conversely, innovative composite steel–concrete base column connections with socket systems exhibit adequate overstrength, inelastic deformations and energy absorption capacity. Furthermore, socket-type connections are characterized by spreading of inelasticity at the base of the composite columns without damage localization on concrete and interface components. It can thus be argued that the innovative connection type assessed in this study is a viable solution for applications in framed structures fulfilling capacity design requirements, e.g. structural systems in earthquake prone regions.

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

[2]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  Seismic design and performance of composite frames , 2004 .

[3]  Wai-Fah Chen,et al.  Handbook of Structural Engineering , 1997 .

[4]  Amr S. Elnashai Seismic response of composite framesI. Response criteria input motion , 1996 .

[5]  Sherif El-Tawil,et al.  Nonlinear Analysis of Steel-Concrete Composite Structures: State of the Art , 2004 .

[6]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  Performance of composite steel/concrete members under earthquake loading. Part I: Analytical model , 1993 .

[7]  Arthur H. Nilson,et al.  Design of concrete structures , 1972 .

[8]  David A. Nethercot,et al.  Material and geometric properties of structural steel for use in design , 1997 .

[9]  N. E. Shanmugam,et al.  State of the art report on steel–concrete composite columns , 2001 .

[10]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Seismic Performance of Steel‐Encased Composite Columns , 1994 .

[11]  Federico M. Mazzolani Steel and Composite Structures in European Seismic Areas: Research, Codification, Design, and Applications , 2003 .

[12]  Tai-Kuang Lee,et al.  Analysis of Composite Beam-Columns under Lateral Cyclic Loading , 2001 .

[13]  Charles W. Roeder Overview of hybrid and composite systems for seismic design in the United States , 1998 .

[14]  K. F. Chung,et al.  Composite column design to Eurocode 4 : based on DD ENV 1994-1-1: 1994 Eurocode 4: design of composite steel and concrete structures: part 1.1: general rules and rules for buildings , 1994 .

[15]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  Seismic Retrofitting of Steel and Composite Building Structures , 2002 .

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

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

[18]  Jerome F. Hajjar,et al.  Composite steel and concrete structural systems for seismic engineering , 2002 .