Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr
Behavior and strength of steel reinforced concrete beamcolumn joints with
two-side force inputs
Cheng-Cheng Chen

, Keng-Ta Lin
Department of Construction Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, No. 43, Sec. 4, Keelung Rd, 106, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 16 November 2007
Accepted 12 March 2008
Keywords:
Steel reinforced concrete (SRC)
Beamcolumn joints
Earthquake-resistant structures
Joints
a b s t r a c t
Experimental results from five large-scale cruciform type beamcolumn subassemblies showed that: (1)
the SRC joint demonstrated a more moderate pinching phenomenon than the RC joint; (2) the shear
strength provided by the longitudinal flanges of the cross-H steel section was significantly higher than
expected; (3) the definition of the joint zone of the SRC column-wide flange beam system should be
modified to match experimental observations; and (4) the corner ties can be used to replace joint hoops
without demonstrating any negative behavior. It was also found that the strength superposition method
was able to predict the SRC joint shear strength with reasonable accuracy.
Crown Copyright 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Steel reinforced concrete (SRC) structural members are com-
posed of concrete, a cross-sectional steel shape, longitudinal steel
bars and transverse steel bars. The sections shown in Fig. 1 are two
typical SRC column sections and a typical SRC beam section. Simi-
lar to a steel structure or a reinforced concrete (RC) structure, the
beamcolumnjoint of the SRCmoment resisting frame (MRF) bears
significant shear force when the frame is under earthquake type
loading. Thus, the shear design of the SRC beamcolumn joint plays
an important role in the seismic design of SRC MRFs.
RC beamcolumn joints are classified by ACI-ASCE 352 [1] as
interior joints, two types of exterior joints and two types of corner
joints as shown in Fig. 2. The appearance and mechanical behavior
of SRC beamcolumn joints possess many similarities with those of
RC joints; hence, the RC beamcolumn joint classification method
is adopted for the SRC beamcolumn joint in this study.
SRC beamcolumn joint research was initiated by Wak-
abayashi [2,3] in Japan. The cross-sectional steel shapes used for
the columns were mainly wide flange steel shapes as shown in
Fig. 1(a). In recent years, Teraoka et al. [4] examined seven spec-
imens with a cross-H steel shape for columns as shown in Fig. 1(b)
with research mainly directed toward examining the effect of the
diaphragm scheme proposed by the authors.
The Japanese [5] and Taiwanese codes [6] have adopted
the concept of superposition for the analysis and design of
beamcolumn joints. However, the role of the longitudinal flanges
of the cross-H steel shape in the beamcolumn joint, as shown

Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 2 27376589; fax: +886 2 27376606.

E-mail address: c3@mail.ntust.edu.tw (C.-C. Chen).
(a) Column with H steel shape. (b) Column with XH steel shape.
(c) Beam.
Fig. 1. Typical SRC column sections and beam section.
in Fig. 1(b), remains unclear and requires further investigation.
Therefore, the joint shear strength contribution by the longitudinal
flanges has usually been neglected. This is likely to result in
conservative designs.
In recent years, there has been more frequent use of the SRC
column-wide flange beam system, in which steel beams are used
instead of SRC beams. The shear behavior and shear strength of the
beamcolumn joint in such a system has yet to be explored.
In this study, five large-scale cruciformtype beamcolumn sub-
assemblies were designed, constructed and tested to investigate
SRC beamcolumn joint behavior. The contribution of the longi-
tudinal flanges to the joint shear strength is determined and the
shear behavior of the beamcolumn joint of the SRC column-wide
0143-974X/$ see front matter Crown Copyright 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.03.010
642 C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649
Table 1
Test specimen matrix
Specimen Column Beam Transverse beam Joint
Member type Steel shape
S-XH Steel XH Steel Exterior Type II
SRC-XH SRC XH SRC Exterior Type II
SRC-XH-TB SRC XH SRC SRC Interior
SRC-H SRC H SRC Exterior Type II
SRC-H-SB SRC H Steel Exterior Type II
(a) Interior Joint. (b) Exterior Joint I. (c) Exterior Joint II.
(d) Corner Joint I. (e) Corner Joint II.
Fig. 2. Types of beamcolumn joints.
(a) Elevation view.
(b) Top view.
Fig. 3. Geometry and dimensions of test specimens (unit: mm).
flange beam system is investigated. Additionally, the applicabil-
ity and accuracy of the strength superposition method to predict
beamcolumn joint shear strength are assessed.
(a) With H steel
shape.
(b) With XH steel
shape.
(c) Pure XH steel shape.
Fig. 4. Column sections used (unit: mm).
(a) Steel beam. (b) SRC beam. (c) Transverse beam.
Fig. 5. Beam sections used (unit: mm).
2. Experimental program
2.1. Test specimens
Table 1 shows the test matrix for the experimental study that
included four beamcolumn subassemblies containing a Type II
exterior joint and one beamcolumn subassembly containing an
interior joint. The geometry and dimensions of the specimens
are shown in Fig. 3. Assuming that the inflection points were
at the mid-span of the beams and mid-height of the columns,
the subassemblies, along with boundary and loading conditions,
simulate part of a frame subjected to an earthquake-induced
moment. Specimen S-XHcontained a steel beamcolumn joint and
each of the other specimens contained an SRC beamcolumn joint.
Shear forces were applied to the joint at the two opposing sides of
the column for all specimens.
The column cross-sectional steel shape used for the SRC-H and
SRC-H-SB specimens were wide flange sections, H390 180
6 20, as shown in Fig. 4(a). The column cross-sectional steel
shape used for the SRC-XH-TB, SRC-XH and S-XH specimens was
a cross-H section, XH390 180 6 20, as shown in Fig. 4(b)
and (c). The XH390 180 6 20 section was composed of two
H390 180 6 20 sections that intersected perpendicularly at
the mid-height of the webs. The beam cross-sectional steel shape
used for all the specimens was H300 180 12 22 as shown
in Fig. 5(a). Complete joint penetration welds connected the beam
flanges and the column flanges. Six ASTMA490 high-strength bolts
connected the beam web with the column flange as shown in
C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649 643
(a) Elevation. (b) Section AA.
Fig. 6. Connection details for wide flange column and beams (unit: mm).
(a) Elevation. (b) Section AA.
Fig. 7. Connection details for the XH column with wide flange beams (unit: mm).
Figs. 6(a) and 7(a). At the beam flange levels, continuity plates or
diaphragmplates were inserted into the column as shown in Figs. 6
and 7. Complete joint penetration welds were then used to connect
the diaphragmplates or the continuity plates to the column flanges
and webs.
The dimensions of the SRC column sections were 480 mm
480 mm as shown in Fig. 4(a) and (b). Four #10 longitudinal steel
bars and #4 transverse hoops with a spacing of 100 mm were
used for all the SRC columns. In the beamcolumn joints of the
SRC specimens, corner ties, instead of hoops, were used to provide
lateral support to the longitudinal steel bars as well as to confine
the concrete at the corners. #3 steel bars with standard 180

hooks
were used for corner ties. The corner ties were especially designed
for use in the joints to reduce the possible difficulties encountered
in placing hoops. The SRC-XH-TB specimen used corner ties as the
design intended and the other SRC specimens used corner ties to
enable direct comparison between specimens. Fig. 8 illustrates the
details of the beamcolumn joints of all the specimens.
SRC beams, as shown in Fig. 5(b), were used for the longitudinal
beams of SRC-XH, SRC-Hand SRC-XH-TB specimens. SRC beams, as
shown in Fig. 5(c), were used for the transverse beams of the SRC-
XH-TB specimen. Pure steel beams, as shown in Fig. 5(a) were used
for the longitudinal beams of SRC-H-SB.
All the cross-sectional steel shapes used were manufactured
using ASTM A572 Grade 50 steel plates and all the steel bars used
were ASTMA706 steel bars. The mechanical properties of the steel
plates and bars are listed in Table 2 and the compressive strength
of the concrete at the time of testing is listed in Table 4.
Table 2
Mechanical properties of the steels used
Steel Yield stress (MPa) Tensile strength (MPa)
6 mm-thick plate 495 647
12 mm-thick plate 437 573
20 mm-thick plate 378 518
22 mm-thick plate 392 512
#3 bar 505 737
#4 bar 511 703
#6 bar 510 710
#10 bar 464 649
2.2. Test setup and procedure
The test setup scheme is shown in Fig. 9. Using a pinned
connection, the bottom end of the specimen was connected to a
base beam that was tied down to a strong floor. Each beam end
was connected to an axial link with the other end of the axial link
connected to the base beam. The top end of the specimen was
connected to a servo-controlled actuator while the other end of
the actuator was connected to the reaction wall. The actuator had
a capacity of 1000 kN and was equipped with a built-in load cell
and a linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) to measure
the force P and the displacement at the load point.
The longitudinal web and one of the longitudinal flanges of the
cross-H section of S-XH were equipped with 3-axis rosettes, as
shown in Fig. 8(a), to undertake the measurements of shear strain.
644 C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649
Table 3
Test results of the specimens
Specimen P
+
peak
(kN)
+
peak
(%) P

peak
(kN)

peak
(%) P
t
(kN) M
b
(kN m) V
b
(kN) V
t
(kN)
S-XH +230 +2.79 198 1.96 214 275 1124 2033
SRC-XH +586 +2.98 589 2.96 588 759 2438 4288
SRC-XH-TB +614 +3.00 673 2.95 644 831 2684 4724
SRC-H +421 +2.96 413 2.95 417 538 1700 2984
SRC-H-SB +243 +2.96 242 2.00 243 313 1198 2152
Table 4
Shear strength predictions for specimens with the SRC column
Specimen V
t
(kN)
RC portion Steel portion V
total
(kN)
Vt
V
total
V
src
(kN)
Vt
Vsrc
f

c
(MPa)
b
(mm)
h
(mm)
b
j
(mm)
A
j
(mm
2
)
V
rc
(kN)
V
sw
(kN)
V

sw
(kN)
V
slf
(kN)
SRC-XH 4288 1.25 28.8 400 480 480 230400 1547 624 816 1089 3452 1.24 3260 1.32
SRC-XH-TB 4724 1.67 28.5 400 480 480 230400 2056 624 816 1089 3962 1.19 3770 1.25
SRC-H 2984 1.25 33.8 400 480 480 230400 1675 624 816 2492 1.20 2300 1.30
SRC-H-SB 2152 1.00 33.8 180 390 480 187200 1089 624 816 1905 1.13 1713 1.26
(a) S-XH.
(b) SRC-XH. (c) SRC-XH-TB.
(d) SRC-H. (e) SRC-H-SB.
Fig. 8. Details of specimens in the beamcolumn joint area.
Two LVDTs were used, as shown in Fig. 13(b), to measure the joint
shear deformation of the SRC joints.
All specimens were loaded under displacement control with
the same drift angle history as shown in Fig. 10. The drift angle is
defined as the ratio of the horizontal displacement to the specimen
height (2930 mm). The load test ended after the strength of the
specimen dropped below80% of the maximumload reached by the
specimen.
3. Experimental results
3.1. General behavior
Fig. 11 illustrates the load versus drift angle hysteresis loops of
all the specimens. The response quantities for the test specimens
are listed in Table 3. The maximum loads in the positive
direction and negative direction are designated as P
+
peak
and P

peak
respectively. The drift angles corresponding to P
+
peak
and P

peak
are
designated as
+
peak
and

peak
respectively. The specimen strength
P
t
of each specimen is defined as the average of P
+
peak
and P

peak
.
According to equilibrium conditions, the reaction force R at the
beam ends (Fig. 3(a)) can be obtained using Eq. (1) and the beam
bending moment at the column surface M
b
can be obtained with
Eq. (2).
R = 2.93P/4.05 (1)
M
b
= R L
b
(2)
where P is the applied load and L
b
is the length, as indicated in
Fig. 3(a).
3.1.1. S-XH specimen
Atotal of 12 cycles were applied to the pure steel specimenwith
a maximum drift angle of 4% as shown in Fig. 11(a). The specimen
was basically within the elastic range during the 0.25% and 0.5%
drift angle cycles. Indication of yielding on the longitudinal web
was observed during the first cycle at a drift angle of 1%. The
specimen underwent stable yielding during the 1% and 2% drift
angle stages.
During the first +3% drift angle cycle, cracks were observed
at the welds. These are indicated as C1 and C2 in Fig. 12. When
the drift angle reached +2.79%, the load suddenly dropped from
+230 to +157 kN. This was caused by the abrupt extension of the
cracks at positions C1 and C2. As the load reversed direction and
reached the 1.83% drift angle, the load suddenly dropped from
199 to 155 kN. Cracks at the weld, indicated as C3 in Fig. 12,
were observed.
The P

peak
(199 kN) was 13% lower than P
+
peak
(+230 kN).
Furthermore, the

peak
(1.83%) was also lower than the
+
peak
(+2.79%). The failure of the specimen in the negative direction
C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649 645
Fig. 9. Test setup.
Fig. 10. Loading history.
was somewhat premature and the P

peak
value may slightly
underestimate the specimen strength. However, from Fig. 13(a),
the longitudinal web of the cross-Hsectioncanbe observed to have
extensively yielded under shear.
3.1.2. SRC-XH and SRC-H specimens
Both the SRC-XH and SRC-H specimens contained an SRC
exterior Type II joint and the strengths of these specimens were
much higher than that of the S-XH specimen. During the test,
the occurrence of slips between the end plate and the connection
plate, as indicated in Fig. 9, were observed. These slips induced a
sudden load drop and the load versus drift angle hysteresis loops
were relatively unsmooth. The slips also introduced an additional
displacement to the specimen but they had basically no effect on
the specimen strength.
A total of 18 and 14 cycles were applied to the SRC-XHand SRC-
H specimens respectively. Cracks in the joint were first observed
during the 0.25% cycle for both the specimens. Fig. 14(a) and (b)
show the crack patterns of the two specimens during peak loads.
Both specimens developed diagonal cracks similar to those in the
RC joints [7,8]. For each specimen, two major diagonal cracks were
identified with each starting from one corner of the joint and
extending diagonally to the other corner of the joint.
The strength P
t
of the SRC-XH specimen (588 kN) was 41%
higher than that of SRC-H (417 kN). The use of a cross-H section
Fig. 11. Load versus displacement hysteresis loops.
provided significantly more strength than the wide flange section.
The loaddrift angle hysteresis loops in Fig. 11(b) and (d) reveal
that both specimens possessed quite a symmetrical response.
Compared to those of the RC joints [7,8], the loaddrift angle
hysteresis loops of the SRC specimens were more saturated and
dissipated relatively more energy. The load versus joint shear
646 C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649
Fig. 12. Condition of the beamcolumn joint region of the S-XHspecimen at P

peak
.
Fig. 13. Joint shear deformation hysteresis loops.
deformation hysteresis loops of SRC-XH, as illustrated in Fig. 13(b),
also show the characteristics of high-energy dissipation capacity.
3.1.3. SRC-H-SB specimen
A total of 16 drift angle cycles were applied to the SRC-H-SB
specimen. Due to the lower stiffness of the beams, diagonal shear
cracks developed at a larger drift angle cycle (0.5% cycle). Fig. 14(c)
shows the crack pattern of SRC-H-SB at P
+
peak
. Two diagonal cracks
can be identified and the maximum crack width measured was
4 mm. Nevertheless, the diagonal crack pattern of SRC-H-SB is
somewhat different from that of SRC-XH and SRC-H. For the cases
of the SRC-XH and SRC-H specimens that employed SRC beams,
the beamcolumn joint zone can be rationally defined as the
intersection area of the beam and the column, as shown by the
shaded area in Fig. 15(a). If the same definition of joint zone is
used, the major diagonal crack pattern for SRC-H-SB does not
match that of SRC-XH and SRC-H. The major diagonal cracks of
SRC-H-SB did not extend from corner-to-corner. It is suggested
that the joint zone of SRC-H-SB be defined as the area enclosed
by the column flanges and the continuity plates as shown in
Fig. 15(b). With this modified definition of the joint zone, the major
diagonal cracks extend in the pattern of from corner-to-corner
as is expected. This modified definition of the joint zone is later
applied to calculate the joint shear strength of SRC-H-SB.
The P
t
of SRC-H-SB was 243 kN, 42% lower than that of SRC-H
(417 kN). Without concrete in the beam, much less concrete in the
joint was activated to provide shear strength to the joint.
3.1.4. SRC-XH-TB specimen
In total 12 cycles were applied to the SRC-XH-TB specimen
with a maximum drift angle of 4%. The strength of the SRC-XH-
TB specimen was the highest among all the specimens examined.
(a) SRC-XH.
(b) SRC-H.
(c) SRC-H-SB.
(d) SRC-XH-TB.
Fig. 14. Concrete crack pattern of specimens at peak load.
Therefore, slips between the end plate and the connection plate
and a sudden load drop were observed to occur.
Since the specimen had transverse beams, the observation of
cracks could only be focused on the end surface of the transverse
beams. Cracks were first observed during the 1.0% cycle. Fig. 14(d)
shows the crack patternobservedat the transverse beamendof the
SRC-XH-TB specimen at P
+
peak
. Cracks first developed along the web
and flanges of the cross-sectional steel shape, and then extended
towards the corners of the beam.
The P
t
of the SRC-XH-TBspecimen(644 kN) was 10%higher than
the P
t
of SRC-XH (588 kN). The transverse beams made an evident
contributionto the joint shear strength. The use of corner ties inthe
C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649 647
(a) Joint zone for SRC-H.
(b) Suggested joint zone for SRC-H-SB.
Fig. 15. Definition of joint zone.
Fig. 16. Forces in the joint zone.
joint did not introduce any negative behavior in the specimen. The
test results provide positive evidence to support the applicability
of the corner ties.
3.2. Beamcolumn joint shear strength
Using P
t
along with Eqs. (1) and (2), the corresponding
M
b
for each specimen can be obtained. According to AISC
specifications [9], the shear force V
b
transferred from each beam
to the joint for the S-XH and SRC-H-SB specimens (note: both
specimens used steel beams) is equal to
V
b
=
M
b
d t
f
(3)
where d = beam depth, and t
f
= beam flange thickness. The shear
force V
b
transferred from the SRC beams to the joint, such as in
the cases of the SRC-XH, SRC-XH-TB and SRC-H specimens, can be
obtained via flexural analysis of the SRC beam section under M
b
.
The BIAX program [10] was used to carry out the analysis and V
b
is taken as the integration of the tensile stresses (or compressive
stresses) in the section. Referring to Fig. 16, the joint shear strength
V
t
, under the occurrence of P
t
, is equal to
V
t
= 2V
b
P
t
. (4)
4. Shear strength evaluation
The force transfer mechanism in the SRC beamcolumn
joints is rather complex. As a result, the most commonly
used and convenient shear strength evaluation method for the
beamcolumn joint is the strength superposition method. Namely,
the shear strength contributed by the cross-sectional steel shape
and RC are first calculated separately, then the two strengths are
superposed to obtain the SRC beamcolumn joint strength. The
applicability and the accuracy of the superposition method are
assessed here against the test results.
4.1. Shear strength contribution of the cross-sectional steel shape
4.1.1. Wide flange cross-sectional steel shapes
For columns with a wide flange cross-sectional steel shape, the
shear strength of the beamcolumn joint along the plane of the
web is primarily provided by the web itself. According to AISC-
LRFDspecifications [9], the shear strength provided by the web V
sw
is:
V
sw
= 0.6F
yw
d
c
t
w
(5)
where F
yw
= yield stress of the column web, d
c
= column depth,
and t
w
=column web thickness. If adequate connection ductility is
provided, additional inelastic shear strength, which is contributed
by transverse flanges and strain hardening of the web, can be
developed [11]. Then, the shear strength V

sw
can be obtained by
Eq. (6) [9].
V

sw
= 0.6F
yw
d
c
t
w

1 +
3b
cf
t
2
cf
d
b
d
c
t
w

(6)
where b
cf
= width of the column flange, t
cf
= thickness of the
column flange, and d
b
=steel beam depth.
4.1.2. XH shapes
There are no shear strength calculation methods provided
by design specifications when an XH cross-sectional steel shape
is used for the column. The shear strength contribution by
the longitudinal web and transverse flanges can be calculated
according to Eq. (5) or (6). The contribution of the longitudinal
flanges is discussed here.
Fig. 17 illustrates the load versus shear strain hysteresis loops
of the longitudinal web and the longitudinal flange of S-XH up to
the first 0.5% drift angle cycle with a maximum positive load of
+72.4 kN. Both the longitudinal web and the longitudinal flange
are basically in their elastic range. The measured shear strain on
the longitudinal web (Fig. 8(a))
Wm
was 0.00236 rad. and the
measured shear strain on the longitudinal flange (Fig. 8(a))
Fm
was 0.00054 rad. The corresponding shear stresses were
Wm
=
180 MPa and
Fm
= 41 MPa respectively.
Fig. 18 shows the shear stress distribution of XH390 180
6 20 calculated according to elastic theory when the section
was subjected to a shear force of 617 kN (at P = +72.4 kN).
The calculated shear stress
Wc
at the position corresponding to

Wm
was 275 MPa. Similarly, the calculated shear stress
Fc
at the
648 C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649
Fig. 17. Shear strain versus load P hysteresis loops of specimen S-XH in the elastic
range.
(a) Flanges.
(b) Longitudinal web.
Fig. 18. Shear flow and shear stress distribution (units =MPa).
position corresponding to
Fm
was 8.7 MPa. The calculated flange
stress
Fc
was only 21% of the measured flange stress
Fm
and the
calculated web stress
Wc
was 153% of the measured stress
Wm
.
The elastic theory significantly underestimates the shear stress on
the longitudinal flange and overestimates the shear stress on the
longitudinal web. This difference is mainly due to the existence
of the diaphragm plates. The diaphragm plates provided not only
a constraint to the section deformation but also additional paths
to transfer shear force to the longitudinal flanges. The elastic
theory does not take these effects into account, thus, it significantly
underestimates the contribution of the longitudinal flange.
Fig. 19 illustrates the drift angle versus shear strain hysteresis
loops of the longitudinal flange of S-XH up to the first loop of the
3% drift angle. In the first half of the 3% drift angle loop, the shear
stress reached yield stress when the drift angle reached 2.13%.
Furthermore, at P
+
peak
, the maximumshear strainof the longitudinal
flange reached 108% of the yield strain. The measured strain data
indicates that the maximumshear stress in the longitudinal flange
Fig. 19. Displacement versus shear strainhysteresis loops of the longitudinal flange
of specimen S-XH.
exceeded the yield stress. Accordingly, it is suggested that the
shear strength provided by the two longitudinal flanges V
slf
can be
approximated by the yield strength of the two longitudinal flanges
V
slf
= 2

2
3

0.6F
yf
A
f

. (7)
The calculated shear strength V
s
, which is defined as the sum of
V

sw
and V
slf
, is 1905 kN. The V
t
/V
s
ratio (0.99) is very close to 1.0.
The calculated shear strength matches the test results reasonably
well. The V
stf
, which is equal to 1089 kN, contributes 57% to the
joint shear strength. The longitudinal flanges provide a significant
portion of the joint strength.
4.2. Shear strength contributed by RC
A requirement of the ACI Code is that transverse hoops be
provided within the beamcolumn joint. However, from test
observations, the function of transverse hoops can be performed
by a combination of the cross-sectional steel shape and corner
ties without exhibiting any negative behavior. Therefore, the ACI
specifications were deemed similar enough to be adopted to
calculate the shear strength provided by the RC section. According
to the ACI 318-05 code [12], the joint shear strength V
rc
can be
calculated by
V
rc
=

c
A
j
(8)
where = 1.67 for joints confined on all four faces,
= 1.25 for joints confined on three faces or on two opposite
faces,
= 1.00 for all other types of joints,
f

c
=concrete compressive strength (MPa),
A
j
= the effective area of the joint = joint depth h effective
joint width b
j
.
It is noted that a beam that frames into a face is considered
to provide confinement to the joint if at least three-quarters of
the face of the joint is covered by the beam [12]. Additionally, the
effective joint width b
j
for a concentric joint should satisfy Eqs. (9a)
and (9b).
b
j
b +h (9a)
bj w (9b)
C.-C. Chen, K.-T. Lin / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 641649 649
where b is the width of the beam, h is the depth of the column, and
w is the width of the column.
Table 4 gives the quantities of the parameters for the calculation
of V
rc
. The width of the SRC beams was 400 mm. This is more than
three-quarters of the face of the joint, therefore = 1.25 is used
for SRC-XH and SRC-H and = 1.67 is used for SRC-XH-TB. Steel
beams, which could provide very little confinement to the joint,
were used for SRC-H-SB. Consequently, it is suggested that these
types of joints be classified as other types of joints, and, = 1.00
be used. According to the modified definition of the joint zone for
SRC-H-SB, the joint depth h is taken to be equal to the depth of the
column cross-sectional steel shape d
s
.
4.3. Shear strength prediction of SRC joints
Using the strength superposition method and V

sw
to represent
the strength of the longitudinal web and the longitudinal flanges,
the shear strength of the SRC beamcolumn joint V
total
is
V
total
= V

sw
+V
slf
+V
rc
. (10)
The calculated V
total
and V
t
/V
total
are listed in Table 4. The values
of V
t
/V
total
range from 1.13 to 1.24 with an average value of
1.19. Eq. (10) underestimates the joint strength by 13%24%.
The underestimation can be expected since the composite effect
between cross-sectional steel shape and concrete was neglected.
The use of V

sw
would possibly introduce too much plastification
near the plastic hinge region and is considered harmful to the
plastic hinge rotation capacity of the beam-to-column connection.
Therefore, for design purposes, it is suggested that V

sw
in Eq. (10)
be replaced by V
sw
. The joint shear strength V
src
then becomes
V
src
= V
sw
+V
slf
+V
rc
. (11)
The calculated values of V
src
and V
t
/V
src
are also listed in Table 4.
The values of V
t
/V
src
range from 1.25 to 1.32 with an average value
of 1.28. Since the number of test specimens is quite limited, it
seems that V
src
provides a more reasonable margin of safety than
V
total
. Therefore, in design, use of V
src
and Eq. (11) are suggested for
the calculation of the nominal joint shear strength.
5. Conclusion
Five large-scale cruciform type beamcolumn subassemblies
were tested under cyclic loading to investigate the shear behavior
and shear strength of SRC beamcolumn joints. The applicability
and accuracy of the strength superposition method for the
estimation of joint shear strength is assessed against test data.
Based on the experimental and analytical results reported herein,
the following conclusions are drawn:
1. The crack pattern of the SRC beamcolumn joint is similar to
that of the RC beamcolumn joints. However, the load versus
joint shear deformation hysteresis loops of the SRC joints are
more saturated than those of the RC joints. As a result, the SRC
joint dissipates relatively more energy.
2. Although the composite effect between cross-sectional steel
shape and concrete is ignored, the method of strength
superposition is able to estimate the SRC beamcolumn joint
shear strength with reasonable accuracy. The ratio of the tested
shear strength over the predicted shear strength ranges from
1.13 to 1.24.
3. The measured shear strain on the longitudinal flanges of the
cross-Hsectioninthe joint was muchhigher thanwas expected.
The maximum shear stress on the flange can be higher
than the yield stress. Consequently, the longitudinal flanges
contribute significantly to the SRC beamcolumn joint shear
strength.
4. Based on the observed crack pattern, the joint zone of the SRC
column-wide flange beamsystemshould be defined as the area
enclosed by the steel column flanges and the continuity plates.
With this definition, the calculated shear strength matched the
tested shear strength well.
5. The combination of using the corner ties and the cross-sectional
steel shape was able to replace the use of joint hoops with no
negative behavior exhibited. The test results provide positive
evidence for the applicability of the corner ties.
Acknowledgment
The research study described herein was sponsored by the
National Science Council of the Republic of China under project
NSC 93-2211-E-011-020. The authors would like to express their
gratitude for the financial support received.
References
[1] ACI-ASCE Committee 352. Recommendations for design of beamcolumn
joints in monolithic reinforced concrete structures. ACI Journal Proceedings
1985; 82 (3): 26683.
[2] Wakabayashi M. Design of earthquake-resistant buildings. New York:
McGraw-Hill; 1986.
[3] Wakabayashi M, Minami K. Developments in composite and mixed construc-
tion: Recent experimental studies on the hysteretic characteristics of beam-
to-column connections in composite structures. In: Kato B, Lu LW, editors.
Proceedings of the U.S.A.-Japan seminar on composite structures and mixed
structural systems. Lehigh University: Fritz Engineering Laboratory; 1980.
p. 21726.
[4] Teraoka M, Morita K, Sasaki S, Katsura D. Experimental study on simplified
steel reinforced concrete beamcolumn joints in construction technology.
Steel & Composite Structures 2001;1(3):295312.
[5] Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ). AIJ standards for structural calculation of
steel reinforced concrete structures. Tokyo; 2001 [in Japanese].
[6] Construction Magazine. Steel reinforced concrete structure design code
requirements and notes. Taiwan (Taipei); 2004 [in Chinese].
[7] Leon RT. Shear strength and hysteretic behavior of interior beamcolumn
joints. ACI Structural Journal 1990;87(1):311.
[8] Durrani AJ, Wight JK. Behavior of interior beam-to-column connections under
earthquake-type loading. ACI Journal Proceedings 1985;82(3):3439.
[9] American Institute of Steel Construction. Specification for structural steel
buildings. Chicago (IL): AISC Inc.; 2005.
[10] Wallace JW. BIAX: revision 1Acomputer programfor the analysis of reinforced
concrete and reinforced masonry sections. In: Report no. CU/Cee-92/4.
Potsdam (New York): Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Clarkson University; 1992.
[11] Krawinkler H. Shear in beamcolumn joints in seismic design of steel frames.
Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) 1978;
15(3):8291.
[12] ACI Committee 318. Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI
318-05) and commentary (ACI 318R-05). Farmington Hills (MI): American
Concrete Institute; 2005.