DESIGN/ANALYSIS EXAMPLE Frame 4 Design

lb ksi

psi .in

kip

1000 .psi

1000 .lb ii14 ii15

1 .. 4 1 .. 5

This example assumes that the piers and superstructure of a two-column pin-supported reinforced-concrete bridge bent have been designed and detailed, such that all geometry and reinforcement details are known.
Wsupe uper rstruct ucture

H bea beam Ig beam Ig

co col l

Hco Hcol

Lco col l

Lbea beam m

Design structural members framing into joint (columns and beams)

Column length: Column diameter: Column long. steel ratio: Column long. steel diameter: Superstructure Weight: Concrete Material Properties: Nominal Compressive Strength: Young's modulus of concrete: Poisson's ratio of concrete: Shear stiffness modulus: Steel Material Properties: Yield stress of reinforcement: Young's modulus of steel Ultimate Steel Strain fy Es u 68 .ksi 29000 .ksi 0.1 E s = 29000 ksi fc Ec c Gc 5500 .psi 57000 . f c .psi 0.2 Ec 2. 1 c G c = 1761 ksi E c = 4227 ksi L col H col col db 36 .ft 6.5 .ft 1.75 .% 1.693 .in 3000 .kip Beam length: Beam depth: Beam width: L beam H beam B beam L col 8 .ft H col

Weight

-1-

Moment-Curvature Characteristics of Column under dead-load axial load (from section analysis using OpenSees): First-yield: Nominal strength: (extreme compressive strain c=0.003) y col n col
5 1 6.0124 .10 . in

My col Mn col Mu col

13511 .kip .ft 17248 .kip .ft 18010 .kip .ft T

0.00019755 .

1 in

Ultimate strength: 1 u col 0.00085891 . (extreme compressive strain in c=0.014) T 1 ynu col 0. y col n col u col Mynu col in
2 .104

0 .kip .in My col Mn col Mu col

Column Moment-Curvature -- DeadLoad

1.5 .104

Moment (kip*ft)

1 .104

5000

0 0

1 .10

2 .10

3 .10

4 4 4 .10 5 .10 Curvature (1/in)

6 .10

7 .10

8 .10

9 .10

-2-

Calculate joint-boundary forces based on equilibrium at maximum moment strength of framing column

L a te t e ra ra l Loa ad d Tension Column

S t at ati i c P u shove r M odel of P o r t al F r am e

L a te r a l D e fl fle e c ti tio o n
Supe er r s t r u ct c tu r e W e ig h t

Analysis I estimate joint-boundary forces from Moment-Curvature Data

In the portal frame, the compression column on the right will reach its nominal strength first:

Hcol ML VL
PL Mp1 P1 V1 Hbeam
======>

H col
M L VL PL C1 V1 jd H beam T1

To calculate joint shear, all you really need is the tension component of the moment couple at the joint interface (hence only the column plastic moment): Mp 1 = 18010 kip .ft

From M- analysis: Assume a value for the moment arm:

Mp 1 jd col T 1

Mu col 0.7 .H col Mp 1

jd col

Vj T1

Tension Force:

-3-

Compression Column

C a lcu la te jo in t sh e a r s tre ss d e m a n d ( v j ) a n d fa c to re d n o m in a l jo in t s h e a r s tre n g th ( v n )( = 0 .8 5 ). (S e e Jo in t M o d e l flo w c h a rt)

C a lc u la t e c o r r e s p o n d in g v e r t ic a l jo in t s h e a r s t r e s s ( v j ) a t m a x im u m f le x u r a l s t r e n g t h o f v e r t ic a l m e m b e r s f r a m in g in t o jo in t

Joint shear force demand: vertical Joint cross-sectional area: Joint shear stress demand:
Categorize joint

V joint A joint v jI

T1 0.75 . H beam .H col

V joint = 3958 kip A joint = 39 ft

2

V joint A joint

v jI = 0.128 f c v jI = 9.5

f c .psi

Weak joint -- Joints designed prior to the 1970s. Typically, these joints have minimal amounts, if any, of transverse reinforcement in the joint. Moderate joint Joints designed between 1970 and 1990. These joints have a nominal amount of transverse reinforcement, enough to sustain concrete cracking without significant strength loss. Intermediate joint Joints that have a nominal amount of transverse reinforcement, enough to sustain concrete cracking, but not enough to sustain yielding of the framing members. Bar yielding may be precluded by the lack of standard hooks, or by insufficient anchorage length for column bars passing through the joint. Strong joint -- Joints designed after 1990, containing significant amounts of horizontal and vertical reinforcement in the joint to enable proper confinement of the joint core and provide the necessary mechanisms for force transfer.
Nom Nomi in a l Shear Strength Strength vn Weak
Joint

vn =5 fc

C a lc u la te fa c to re d n o m in a l jo in t s h e a r s tr e n g th , v n ( = 0 .8 5 )

Modera oderate Joint

vn =5 fc

Intermed termediate iate Joi Joint

vn =7 =7.5 .5 fc

Strong Strong Joint Joint

SDC SD C limits limits

Joint shear strength: Weak & Moderate joint: vn weak vn mod vn int 5 . f c .psi

strength-reduction factor:

0.85 f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi

.vn weak = 4.25 .vn mod = 4.25 .vn int = 6.375

5 . f c .psi intermediate joint: 7.5 . f c .psi

Strong joint, look at principal stress limits, per SDC:

(7.8) Principal compression (7.9) Principal tension

p c 0.25. f c
p t 12. f c. psi

-4-

Principal Tensile stress: fh 2 fv fh 2 fv

2 2

Principal Compressive stress: fh 2 Dc fv fh 2 D s .B cap fh fv

2 2

pt v jv

v jv

pc fv Pc A jh A jh

v jv

Tc A jv

A jv l ac .B cap

Pb B cap .D s

Where: Ajh = The effective horizontal joint area Ajv = The effective vertical joint area Bcap = Bent cap width Dc = Cross-sectional dimension of column in the direction of bending Ds = Depth of superstructre at the bent cap lac = Length of column reinforcement embedded into the bent cap Pc = The column axial force including the effects of overturning Pb = The beam axial force at the center of the joint including prestressing Tc = The column tensile force defined as Mocol/h, where h is the distance from c.g. of tensile force to c.g. of compressive force on the section, or alternatively Tc may be obtained from moment-curvature analysis of the cross section.
Converting the principal-stress limits to joint shear-stress limits (since the SDC do not use the strength reduction factor, to maintain consistency, v n = SDC-limit value / ). max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal tensile stress limits max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal compressive stress limits Applying to the frame: B cap l ac Pc Pb A jh Dc B beam 0.90 .H beam Weight 2 0 .kip D s .B cap Assume no beam axial force in the bent A jv Pt max l ac .B cap 12 . f c .psi Pc max fv 0.25 .f c Pc A jh fh Pb B cap .D s Dc H col Ds H beam v jT 1. 2 1. 2 fh
2

2 .f h .f v 2 .f h .f v

fv

fh 2 .p c

fv

2 .p t

.1 .1

v jC

fh

fv

fh

fv

Assume column longitudinal reinforcement is embedded across the entire beam depth (minus cover) Overturning effects cannot be estimated at this time.

SDC limits:

Pc max = 1375 psi

-5-

max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal tensile stress limits max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal compressive stress limits

v jmaxT

1. 2 1. 2

fh

2 .f h .f v 2 .f h .f v

fv

fh

fv

2 .Pt max

.1 .1

v jmaxC

fh

fv

2 .Pc max

fh

fv

v jmaxT = 13.212 strong joint: vn strongI min v jmaxT v jmaxC

f c .psi

v jmaxC = 20.917 .vn strongI = 11.23

f c .psi f c .psi

v jI = 2.24 .vn weak

Compare joint shear stress demand to factored strength.

v jI = 2.24 .vn mod v jI = 1.49 .vn int v jI = 0.85 .vn strongI

v j < 0.5 ( v n ) Beam-column joint can be assumed rigid

0.5 ( v n ) # v j # v n

v j $ vn Strength and stiffness degradation can be expected

Beam-column joint can be modeled as elastic member. Yielding of beam column joints will occur without measurable strength loss.

0.5 . .vn weak = 2.125 0.5 . .vn mod = 2.125 0.5 . .vn int = 3.188

f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi v jI = 9.504 f c .psi

.vn weak = 4.25 .vn mod = 4.25 .vn int = 6.375

f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi

0.5 . .vn strongI = 5.615 Weak joint: Moderate joint: Intermediate joint: Strong joint:

.vn strongI = 11.23

v j > .v n v j > .v n v j > .v n 0.5 . .v n < v j < .v n

strength and stiffness degradation can be expected strength and stiffness degradation can be expected strength and stiffness degradation can be expected Beam-column joint can be modeled as elastic member. Yielding of beam-column joint may occur without measurable strength loss.

C o n s tr u c t jo in t m o d e l ( s e e J o in t M o d e l f lo w c h a r t)

-6-

ALTERNATIVELY, the joint-boundary forces, and joint shear stress, can be obtained from a nonlinear pushover analysis of the frame to the prescribed limit state. Here, the limit state is defined by crushing of the concrete in the critical column section. A nonlinear pushover analysis was performed on a model of the bridge frame where nonlinear inelastic elements were used to represent the columns and an elastic element was used to represent the beam. The left and right columns of the bridge bent are referred to Tension Column and Compression Column, respectively, due to the effects of overturning. Both columns, however, are likely to be in compression, as the gravity axial loads exceed the overturning axial loads. The joint-boundary forces were obtained from this analysis at the column limit state:

Lat La t e r a l Load Lo ad V co col lL M col L

V beam

M b eam L Pb Pbe eam

M beam bea m R P beam

V beam

V col R
M col R
Pco Pc o lL Pco Pc o l R

Tens Te nsi i on Co C o lu m n
Pcol L Vcol L Mbeam L Mcol L 514 .kip 446.3 .kip
4 2.6278 .10 .kip .ft 4 1.6066 .10 .kip .ft

Com Co m p r e s s i o n Col Co l u m n
Pbeam Vbeam 46.6 .kip 985.7 .kip Pcol R Vcol R Mbeam R Mcol R 2485.7 .kip 539.5 .kip
4 1.1991 .10 .kip .ft 4 1.9421 .10 .kip .ft

The column end moments can be compared to the ultimate moment of the column under dead-load axial force. The overturning tension and compression forces place the column-end moments above the DL ultimate moment for the case of the compression column and below the DL ultimate moment for the case of the tension column. Column Moment-Curvature 4 2 .10

1.5 .10 Moment (kip*ft)

1 .10

5000

0 0

1 .10

2 .10

3 .10

4 4 4 .10 5 .10 Curvature (1/in)

6 .10

7 .10

8 .10

9 .10

Deal-load Axial Force Tension Column (Mu) Compression Column (Mu)

-7-

Analysis II determine joint-boundary forces from Pushover analysis (tension column)

Even though the compression column is expected to result in the higher joint shear stresses, both joints will be evaluated. Left-hand (Tension column) beam-column joint:

Hco col l Lateral Load Hbea beam m Mp1 P1 V1 VR MR PR

column: Mp 1 P1 V1 Mcol L Pcol L Vcol L

beam: MR PR VR Mbeam L Pbeam Vbeam

Mp 1 = 16066 kip .ft P 1 = 514 kip V 1 = 446.3 kip

M R = 26278 kip .ft P R = 46.6 kip V R = 986 kip

In converting the column moment into a couple we realize that the only item of interest is actually T 1 , the tension component of the couple

Hcol Lateral Load Hbea beam m T1 V1 jd C1

Joint shear force: V joint A joint = 39 ft
2

VR MR

Vj
PR
====>

jd col T1

0.7 .H col Mp 1 jd col

T1

Cross-sectional area of joint:

T1

Joint shear stress: V joint v jII A joint v jII = 8.5 v jI = 9.5 f c .psi f c .psi

V joint = 3531 kip from a section analysis we had: the section-analysis case is more conservative.

v jII = 1.99 .vn weak v jII = 1.99 .vn mod v jII = 1.33 .vn int

Comparing the joint shear-stress demand to the factored strengths:

-8-

In this case, we can incorporate the actual value for the column and beam axial forces in determining the strength of the strong joint, based on the principal-stress ratios: Converting the principal-stress limits to joint shear-stress limits: max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal tensile stress limits max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal compressive stress limits Applying to the frame: B cap l ac Pc P b
A jh Dc B beam 0.90 .H beam Pcol L Pbeam D s .B cap Dc H col Ds H beam v jT 1. 2 1. 2 fh
2

2 .f h .f v 2 .f h .f v

fv

fh 2 .p c

fv

2 .p t

.1 .1

v jC

fh

fv

fh

fv

Assume column longitudinal reinforcement is embedded across the entire beam depth (minus cover) Overturning effects cannot be estimated at this time.
Assume no beam axial force in the bent A jv Pt max l ac .B cap 12 . f c .psi Pc max fv 0.25 .f c Pc A jh fh Pb B cap .D s

SDC limits:

Pc max = 1375 psi

max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal tensile stress limits

v jmaxT

1. 2 1. 2

fh

2 .f h .f v 2 .f h .f v

fv

fh

fv

2 .Pt max

.1 .1

max. allowable vertical shear stress v jmaxC based on principal compressive stress limits

fh

fv

2 .Pc max

fh

fv

v jmaxT = 13.766 strong joint: vn strongII min v jmaxT v jmaxC

f c .psi

v jmaxC = 21.461

f c .psi f c .psi

.vn strongII = 11.701

Therefore:

v jII = 0.72 .vn strongII

-9-

Analysis II determine joint-boundary forces from Pushover analysis (tension column)

Right-hand (Compression column) beam-column joint:

Hcol ML VL PL Mp1 P1 V1 Hbeam

column: Mp 1 P1 V1 Mcol R Pcol R Vcol R

beam: ML PL VL Mbeam R Pbeam Vbeam

4

Mp 1 = 19421 kip .ft P 1 = 2.486 .10 kip

3

M L = 1.199 .10 kip .ft P L = 46.6 kip V L = 986 kip

V 1 = 539.5 kip

In converting the column moment into a couple we realize that the only item of interest is actually T 1 , the tension component of the couple

H co col l
M L V L
PL C1 V1 jd H b ea eam T1

Vj T1

jd col T1

0.7 .H col Mp 1 jd col

Cross-sectional area of joint:

Joint shear force: V joint T1

Joint shear stress: V joint v jIII A joint v jIII = 10.2 v jI = 9.5 f c .psi <<<<<

A joint = 39 ft

V joint = 4268 kip from a simple section analysis we had:

f c .psi

The simple analysis yielded a lower joint shear stress than the nonlinear pushover analysis, as expected. The error, however, is within reasonable bounds (5%). It is, however, recommended that the nonlinear pushover analysis be used in determining joint-boundary forces. v jIII = 2.41 .vn weak Comparing the joint shear-stress demand to the factored strengths: v jIII = 2.41 .vn mod v jIII = 1.61 .vn int

- 10 -

In this case, we can incorporate the actual value for the column and beam axial forces in determining the strength of the strong joint, based on the principal-stress ratios: Converting the principal-stress limits to joint shear-stress limits: max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal tensile stress limits max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal compressive stress limits Applying to the frame: B cap l ac Pc P b
A jh Dc B beam 0.90 .H beam Pcol R Pbeam D s .B cap Dc H col Ds H beam v jT 1. 2 1. 2 fh
2

2 .f h .f v 2 .f h .f v

fv

fh 2 .p c

fv

2 .p t

.1 .1

v jC

fh

fv

fh

fv

Assume column longitudinal reinforcement is embedded across the entire beam depth (minus cover) Overturning effects cannot be estimated at this time.
Assume no beam axial force in the bent A jv Pt max l ac .B cap 12 . f c .psi Pc max fv 0.25 .f c Pc A jh fh Pb B cap .D s

SDC limits:

Pc max = 1375 psi

max. allowable vertical shear stress based on principal tensile stress limits

v jmaxT

1. 2 1. 2

fh

2 .f h .f v 2 .f h .f v

fv

fh

fv

2 .Pt max

.1 .1

max. allowable vertical shear stress v jmaxC based on principal compressive stress limits

fh

fv

2 .Pc max

fh

fv

v jmaxT = 12.537 strong joint: vn strongIII

f c .psi

v jmaxC = 20.262

f c .psi f c .psi

min v jmaxT v jmaxC

.vn strongIII = 10.657

Therefore: Factor for stong-joint model: 1. SDC min 2 1. 2 fh fh

2

v jIII = 0.96 .vn strongIII THIS CASE CONTROLS

2 .f h .f v 2 .f h .f v

fv fv

fh

fv

2 .Pt max fh fv

.
2

1 f c .psi SDC = 10.7

2 .Pc max

- 11 -

The results from the nonlinear analysis can be used, yielding the same conclusions as the section analysis:

v j < 0.5 ( v n )

0.5 ( v n ) # v j # v n

vj $ vn Strength and stiffness degradation can be expected

Beam -colum n joint can be assum ed rigid

Beam -colum n joint can be m odeled as elastic m em ber. Yielding of beam colum n joints will occur without m easurable strength loss.

0.5 . .vn weak = 2.125 0.5 . .vn mod = 2.125 0.5 . .vn int = 3.188

f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi v jIII = 10.248 f c .psi

.vn weak = 4.25 .vn mod = 4.25 .vn int = 6.375

f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi f c .psi

0.5 . .vn strongIII = 5.328

.vn strongIII = 10.657

Weak & moderate joint: Intermediate joint: Strong joint:

v j > .v n v j > .v n 0.5 . .v n < v j < .v n

strength and stiffness degradation can be expected strength and stiffness degradation can be expected Yielding of beam-column joint will occur without strength loss.

C o n s tru c t jo in t m o d e l (s e e J o in t M o d e l flo w c h a rt)

R ig id 100Kj

E la s tic Kj S tro n g K j/4

B j= B colu m n H j= H bea m T j= B be a m K j=G (B jH jT j)

spring moment (psi)

S D C f c (B j H j T j ) 7.5 f c (B j H j T j )
K j/1 0

In te rm e d ia te

5 f c

(B j H j T j )
co l E s( B jH jT j) W e ak

M o d e ra te

3.5 f c (B j H j T j )

ro tatio n /sh ear strain

- 12 -

Joint geometry:

Bj

H col

Hj Kj

H beam G c . B j .H j .T j

Tj

B beam
7

Elastic stiffness of joint spring: Weak Joint Model: Cracking strength: Initial stiffness: Rotation at cracking: Post-cracking stiffness: Yield strength: Rotation at yield: Ultimate strength: Rotation at ultimate: Post-yield stiffness:

K j = 8.573 .10

kip .ft rad

Mcr w K1 w cr w K2 w My w y w Mu w u w K3 w j w

3.5 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j Kj Mcr w K1 w col .E s . B j .H j .T j 5 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j cr w My w Mcr w

Mcr w = 12634 kip .ft K1 w = 8.573 .10

7

kip .ft rad

4

cr w = 1.474 .10 K2 w = 0.288 K j

rad

My w = 18048 kip .ft y w = 3.666 .10 Mu w = 0 kip .ft

4

rad

K2 w

0 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j 0.01 Mu w u w My w y w T Mj w 0. rad

K3 w = 0.022 K j kip .ft T Mcr w My w Mu w

vectorize:

0 .rad cr w y w u w

Moderate Joint Model: (this joint model has the same pre-yield characteristics as the weak model. There is, however, a nominal amount of reinforcement in the joint to prevent immediate strength loss) In this example, the joint is actually able to sustain the strength. Cracking strength: Initial stiffness: Rotation at cracking: Post-cracking stiffness: Yield strength: Rotation at yield: Ultimate strength: Rotation at ultimate: Post-yield stiffness: u m 0.01 K3 m Mu m u m My m y m K3 m = 2.185 .10
11

Mcr m K1 m cr m K2 m My m y m Mu m

Mcr w K1 w cr w K2 w My w y w 1.000000001 .My m

Mcr m = 12634 kip .ft K1 m = 8.573 .10

7

kip .ft rad

4

cr m = 1.474 .10 K2 m = 0.288 K j

rad

My m = 18048 kip .ft y m = 3.666 .10

4

rad

Mu m = 1.805 .10 kip .ft

4

Kj

- 13 -

vectorize:

j m

0 .rad cr m y m u m

Mj m

0.

kip .ft rad

T Mcr m My m Mu m

Intermediate Joint Model: Cracking strength: Initial stiffness: Rotation at cracking: Mcr i K1 i cr i K2 i My i y i 5 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j Kj Mcr i K1 i K1 i 10 7.5 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j cr i My i Mcr i Mcr i = 18048 kip .ft K1 i = 8.573 .10
7

kip .ft rad

4

cr i = 2.105 .10 K2 i = 0.1 K j

rad

Post-cracking stiffness: Yield strength: Rotation at yield:

My i = 27072 kip .ft y i = 1.263 .10

3

rad

K2 i

The ultimate strength of the intermediate joint needs to be determined by the designer. The case considered in this example is an intermediate joint with suffient confinement to sustain deformations beyond yield without strength loss: Ultimate strength: Rotation at ultimate: Post-yield stiffness: Mu i u i K3 i 0 .rad cr i y i u i SDC = 10.7 Mcr s K1 s cr s K2 s My s y s 7.5 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j Kj Mcr s K1 s K1 s 10 SDC . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j cr s My s Mcr s Mcr s = 27072 kip .ft K1 s = 8.573 .10
7

1.001 .My i 0.1 Mu i u i T Mj i My i y i 0. kip .ft rad

Mu i = 27099 kip .ft

K3 i = 3.198 .10 T Mcr i My i Mu i

Kj

vectorize:

j i

Strong Joint Model: Cracking strength: Initial stiffness:

kip .ft rad

4

Rotation at cracking:

cr s = 3.158 .10 K2 s = 0.1 K j

rad

Post-cracking stiffness: Yield strength: Rotation at yield:

My s = 38467 kip .ft y s = 1.645 .10

3

rad

K2 s

- 14 -

s The ultimate strength of the strong joint needs to be determined by the designer. The case considered in this example is an intermediate joint with suffient confinement to sustain deformations well beyond yield with significant strength gain: Ultimate strength: Rotation at ultimate: Post-yield stiffness: Mu s u s K3 s 0 .rad cr s y s u s 1.25 .My s 0.1 Mu s u s T My s y s Mj s 0. kip .ft rad K3 s = 1.141 .10 Mcr s My s Mu s Mcr e = 27072 kip .ft K1 e = 8.573 .10
7 3

Mu s = 48083 kip .ft

Kj

vectorize:

j s

Elastic Joint Model: Cracking strength: Initial stiffness: Rotation at cracking: Post-cracking stiffness: Yield strength:
Rotation at yield:
Ultimate strength: Post-yield stiffness: Rotation at ultimate: Mcr e K1 e cr e K2 e My e y e Mu e K3 e u e 0 .rad cr e y e u e 7.5 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j Kj Mcr e K1 e K1 e 15 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j cr e My e Mcr e

kip .ft rad

4

cr e = 3.158 .10 K2 e = 1 K j

rad

My e = 54144 kip .ft y e = 6.316 .10

4

rad

1.25 .My e K1 e Mu e K3 e T

K2 e

Mu e = 67680 kip .ft K3 e = 1 K j

vectorize: Rigid Joint Model:

j e

Mj e

0.

kip .ft rad

T Mcr e My e Mu e

Cracking strength:
Initial stiffness:
Rotation at cracking: Post-cracking stiffness: Yield strength: Rotation at yield:

Mcr r K1 r cr r K2 r My r y r

7.5 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j 100 .K j Mcr r K1 r K1 r 15 . f c .psi . B j .H j .T j cr r My r Mcr r

Mcr r = 27072 kip .ft K1 r = 8.573 .10

9

kip .ft rad

6

cr r = 3.158 .10 K2 r = 100 K j

rad

My r = 54144 kip .ft y r = 6.316 .10

6

rad

K2 r

- 15 -

r Ultimate strength: Post-yield stiffness: Rotation at ultimate: Mu r K3 r u r j r 1.25 .My r K1 r Mu r K3 r T Mj r 0. kip .ft rad T Mcr r My r Mu r Mu r = 67680 kip .ft K3 r = 100 K j

vectorize: Weak Joint Model:

0 .rad cr r y r u r

Moderate Joint Model: T j m = ( 0 0.00015 0.00037 0.01 ) rad T Mj m = ( 0 12634 18048 18048 ) kip .ft Strong Joint Model: T 4 j s = 0 3.158 .10 1.645 .10

T j w = ( 0 0.00015 0.00037 0.01 ) rad T Mj w = ( 0 12634 18048 0 ) kip .ft Intermediate Joint Model: T j i = ( 0 0.00021 0.00126 0.1 ) rad T Mj i = ( 0 18048 27072 27099 ) kip .ft Elastic Joint Model: T j e = ( 0 0.00032 0.00063 0.00079 ) rad T Mj e = ( 0 27072 54144 67680 ) kip .ft
7 .104

0.1 rad

T
Mj s = ( 0 27072 38467 48083 ) kip .ft Rigid Joint Model: T j r = 0 3.158 .10
6

6.316 .10

7.895 .10

rad

T Mj r = ( 0 27072 54144 67680 ) kip .ft Joint Spring Moment-Rotation

6 .10

5 .104

Moment (kip*ft)

4 .104

3 .10

2 .10

1 .104

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008 Curvature (1/in)

0.01

0.012

0.014

- 16 -

Curvature (1/in)

Construct hinge model (see Hinge Model flow chart)

P erform M om e n t-C urvatu re ana lysis of colu m n se ction . C a lculate m o m ent-cu rvatu re d a ta : M y , M n , M u , a n d co rre spo nd in g stee l strain ( s y , s n , s u ). S ave se ction p rope rties: co lum n diam e te r (H c ), lon gitud ina l-ba r d iam ete r (d b )
Moment, M
[( M n , n ),

sn] s y]

[( M u , u ),

su]

[( M y , y ),

C urvature,

The first part of this task was performed in the design process: 0 ynu col = 6.012 .10 1.975 .10 8.589 .10
5

0 1
4 4

in

Mynu col =

13511 17248 18010

kip .ft

The steel strains at the moment-curvature points need to be extracted from the moment-curvature analysis. They can, however, be determined from the data: steel strain at section yield strength s y H core c n s n c u s u fy Es 0.9 .H col 0.003 n col .H core 0.004 c n s n = 0.011 c u = 0.034 s u = 0.026
(u, 3fy) (1u, 1fy) (p2, fp2) (2u, 2fy)

assume the column core diameter is 90% of the column diameter: The nominal strength of the column is defined by the concrete strain: Assuming a linear curvature distribution, steel strain at nominal section flexural strength: The ultimate strength of the column is defined by the concrete strain: Assuming a linear curvature distribution, steel strain at ultimate section flexural strength:

u 1.4 . col .f y . fc c u

u col .H core

fu fp

Stress

Determine simplified steel and concrete material model: fy, y, u, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2 , fc

fy

2 = 1 +
y p

3 1 ( 1 ) 1 1 2
u

Strain

- 17 -

The following values are recommended for nominal material properties, based on an approximation
of the SBD steel model:
1 3 1 2 y 2 1.32 1.4 0.5 0.75 f y E s
1 3 1 1
. 2 1 1 = ratio of secondary steel plastic stress (an intermediate point between ultimate and p ) T Fs 0 .psi f y f p f p2 f u T f p2 2 .f y = ratio of steel plastic stress (initiation of strain hardening) to yield stress f p (1 = fp /fy) = ratio of steel ultimate stress to yield stress ( 2 = fu /fy) = ratio of steel plastic strain to ultimate strain ( 1 = p /u ) = ratio of secondary steel plastic strain (an intermediate point between ultimate and p ) to ultimate strain ( 2 = p 2/u ) = steel yield strain fu p p2 1 .f y 3 .f y 1 . u 2 . u

p = 0.05

2 = 1.36

0 y p p2 u
100

Assumed Steel Stress-Strain Relationship

Stress (ksi)

50

0.02

0.04 Strain

0.06

0.08

0.1

eak Str trong ong Inter Intermediate diate Weak bar stress stress model: bond mo model : bond mo mode del: l: bond model:

Select Bond-Stress Model

=30 0 fc ue=3 up=3 =30 0 fc

ue=3 =30 0 up=1 =15 5

fc fc

ue=12 up=6

fc fc

pr pre e-yield post-y post-yield

Weak bond model:

pre-yield bond stress: post-yield bond stress:

u ew u pw

12 . f c .psi 6 . f c .psi u ei u pi 30 . f c .psi 15 . f c .psi

Intermediate bond model:

pre-yield bond stress: post-yield bond stress:

Strong bond model:

pre-yield bond stress: post-yield bond stress:

u es u ps

30 . f c .psi 30 . f c .psi

- 18 -

 y, y

1. d b . 4 Hc

fy y. ue 1. d b . y 4 Hc 1. d b . 4 Hc y y 1. u . 1 1. u . 1 1 fy 1 . up 1 u. 1 u. 1 2 . 2 1 1 f . y up

Determine rotation vs. steel-strain relationship

1. u , p y 2. u , p 1 y u, u y

1. d b . 4 Hc

1. u . 1

1 . 3

f . y up

Weak bond model: 1. d b . . fy yw y 4 H col u ew fy 1. d b . pw yw y 1 . u . 1 1 . 4 H col u

pw fy 1 . d b
. p1w yw u. 1 2 . 2 1 . y 1 . u . 1 1 4 H col u pw fy 1. d b . u. 1 1 . 3 1 . uw yw y 1 . u . 1 1 4 H col u pw w Intermediate bond model: 1. d b . .fy y 4 H col u ei fy 1. d b . pi yi y 1 . u . 1 1 . 4 H col u pi
fy 1 . d b
. p1i yi u. 1 2 . 2 1 . y 1 . u . 1 1 4 H col u pi fy 1. d b . u. 1 1 . 3 1 . ui yi y 1 . u . 1 1 4 H col u pi yi T i 0 yi pi p1i ui Strong bond model: 1. d b . . fy y ys 4 H col u es fy 1. d b . ps ys y 1 . u . 1 1 . 4 H col u ps
fy 1 . d b
. p1s ys u. 1 2 . 2 1 . y 1 . u . 1 1 4 H col u ps fy 1. d b . u. 1 1 . 3 1 . us ys y 1 . u . 1 1 4 H col u ps T s 0 ys ps p1s us 0 yw pw p1w uw

yw = 0.00097 rad pw = 0.015 rad p1w = 0.019 rad uw = 0.025 rad T

yi = 0.00039 rad pi = 0.00594 rad p1i = 0.0076 rad ui = 0.00993 rad

ys = 0.00039 rad ps = 0.00317 rad p1s = 0.004 rad us = 0.00516 rad

- 19 -

0.03

Hinge Rotation vs. Steel Strain

hinge rotation (rad.)

0.02

0.01

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05 steel strain

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

Weak Bond Model Intermediate Bond Model Strong Bond Model

Rotation,

su
(2u, p1) (1u, p)

(u, u)

Interpolate moment-curvature steel strains (sy, sn, su) in steel-strain vs. rotation relationship to obtain (sy, sn, su)

(y, y)

Strain,
Weak bond model: Hinge rotation at My: Hinge rotation at Mn: Hinge rotation at Mu: Intermediate bond model: Hinge rotation at My: Hinge rotation at Mn: Hinge rotation at Mu: Strong bond model: Hinge rotation at My: Hinge rotation at Mn: Hinge rotation at Mu: Critical Moments: Mh yi ni ui ys ns linterp s , i , s y linterp s , i , s n linterp s , i , s u linterp s , s , s y linterp s , s , s n h s h i yw nw uw linterp s , w , s y linterp s , w , s n linterp s , w , s u h w

su

0 yw nw uw

0 yi ni ui

us linterp s , s , s u Mynu col

0 ys ns us

- 20 -

Moment, M

(Mn,sn) (My, sy)

(Mu, su )

Plot Moment-Rotation relationship for hinge spring element (sy ,My) (sn ,Mn) (su ,Mu)

Rotation,
Weak bond model: 0 h w = 0.00097 0.00346 0.00787
2 .10 4

Intermediate bond model: 0

Strong bond model: 0

Critical Moments: 0

rad

h i =

0.00039 0.00138 0.00315

rad

h s =

0.00039 0.00089 0.00177

rad

Mh =

13511 17248 18010

kip .ft

Hinge Moment vs. Rotation

1.5 .10

hinge moment (kip-ft)

1 .10

5000

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004 hinge rotation (rad.)

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

Weak Bond Model

Intermediate Bond Model
Strong Bond Model

- 21 -

Proceed to calculating structural displacement capacities and demands using the recommended joint and hinge models.
Select joint and hinge cathegory and model.
Incorporate rotational springs at the joint nodes and column ends.

jo in t fle x ib ility b e a m e le m e n t

column element

h in g e fle x ib ility

b o u n d a ry c o n d itio n s

Static-Capacity calculations: Perform nonlinear static pushover analysis to determine drift capacity. Dynamic-Demand calculations: 1. perform nonlinear dynamic analyses with design-level ground motions to determine drift demands. or 2. Calculate effective elastic stiffness of bridge bent which accounts for hinge and joint flexibilities. Use elastic design spectra to determine drift demands.

- 22 -

column element

SUMMARY
Geometry: Column length: Column diameter: Column long. steel ratio: Column long. steel diameter: Superstructure Weight: L col = 36 ft H col = 6.5 ft col = 1.75 % d b = 1.693 in
Weight = 3000 kip
Beam length: Beam depth: Beam width: L beam
= 36 ft H beam
= 8 ft
B beam
= 6.5 ft

Joint Analysis III determine joint-boundary forces from Pushover analysis (compression column).
This is the most accurate analysis

Joint shear stress demand: Factored nominal joint shear strength: Weak joint: Moderate joint: .vn weak = 4.25 .vn mod = 4.25 f c .psi f c .psi Intermediate joint: Strong joint: .vn int = 6.375 f c .psi f c .psi v jIII = 0.138 f c v jIII = 10.2 f c .psi

.vn strongIII = 10.657

v j < 0 .5 ( v n )

0 .5 ( v n ) # v j # v n

vj $ vn S tr e n g th a n d s t if f n e s s
d e g r a d a t io n c a n
b e e x p e c te d

B e a m - c o lu m n jo in t c a n b e a s s u m e d r ig id

B e a m - c o lu m n jo in t c a n b e m o d e le d a s e la s t ic m e m b e r . Y ie ld in g o f b e a m c o lu m n jo in t s w ill o c c u r w it h o u t m e a s u r a b l e
s tr e n g th lo s s .

v jIII = 4.823 0.5 . .vn weak v jIII = 4.823 0.5 . .vn mod v jIII = 3.215 0.5 . .vn int v jIII = 1.923 0.5 . .vn strongIII Weak & moderate joint: Intermediate joint: Strong joint: v j > .v n v j > .v n 0.5 . .v n < v j < .v n v jIII = 0.962 .vn strongIII

v jIII = 2.411 .vn weak v jIII = 2.411 .vn mod v jIII = 1.608 .vn int

strength and stiffness degradation can be expected strength and stiffness degradation can be expected Yielding of beam-column joint will occur without strength loss.

- 23 -

Weak Joint Model: T j w = ( 0 0.00015 0.00037 0.01 ) rad T Mj w = ( 0 12634 18048 0 ) kip .ft Intermediate Joint Model: T j i = ( 0 0.00021 0.00126 0.1 ) rad T Mj i = ( 0 18048 27072 27099 ) kip .ft Elastic Joint Model: T j e = ( 0 0.00032 0.00063 0.00079 ) rad T Mj e = ( 0 27072 54144 67680 ) kip .ft
7 .104

Moderate Joint Model: T j m = ( 0 0.00015 0.00037 0.01 ) rad T Mj m = ( 0 12634 18048 18048 ) kip .ft Strong Joint Model: T 4 j s = 0 3.158 .10 1.645 .10

0.1 rad

T Mj s = ( 0 27072 38467 48083 ) kip .ft Rigid Joint Model: T j r = 0 3.158 .10
6

6.316 .10

7.895 .10

rad

T Mj r = ( 0 27072 54144 67680 ) kip .ft Joint Spring Moment-Rotation

6 .10

5 .104

Moment (kip*ft)

4 .104

3 .10

2 .10

1 .104

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008 Curvature (1/in)

0.01

0.012

0.014

Weak Joint
Moderate Joint
Intermediate Joint
Strong Joint
Elastic Joint
Rigid Joint (not visible in this scale)

- 24 -

HINGE MODEL
Moment-Curvature Data (yield, nominal & ultimate points): T ynu col = 0 6.012 .10
5

1.975 .10

8.589 .10

1 in

T Mynu col = ( 0 13511 17248 18010 ) kip .ft

eak k Strong Inte ntermedia diate Wea bar s st tres ress model del: bond mo model del : bond mo model del: bond mo

Select Bond-Stress Model

ue=30 =30 fc up=30 =30 fc

ue=30 =30 fc up=15 =15 fc

ue=12 fc up=6 fc

pre pr e-yield post post-yield

Moment-Rotation Charactristics of Hinge Model: Weak bond model: 0 h w = 0.00097 0.00346 0.00787
2 .10 4

Intermediate bond model: 0

Strong bond model: 0

Critical Moments: 0

rad

h i =

0.00039 0.00138 0.00315

rad

h s =

0.00039 0.00089 0.00177

rad

Mh =

13511 17248 18010

kip .ft

Hinge Moment vs. Rotation

1.5 .10

hinge moment (kip-ft)

1 .10

5000

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004 hinge rotation (rad.)

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

Weak Bond Model Intermediate Bond Model Strong Bond Model

- 25 -

- 26 -