| 摘要(英) |
In the past, there has been no clear guidance in the relevant codes regarding the rotational deformation capacity of beam-column joints in reinforced concrete moment-resisting frames. However, a series of past studies on beam-column joints has confirmed that, under code-compliant configurations, they can provide a deformation capacity of at least 4% inter-story drift ratio. This study aims to observe the performance of exterior beam-column joints by varying the use of headed reinforcement bars and the seismic anchorage development length of these bars. Additionally, it explores the rotational deformation demands on beam-column joints, including those for interior beam-column joints.
This study involved a total of nine beam-column joint specimens subjected to cyclic loading tests, with seven specimens being exterior beam-column joints and two specimens being interior beam-column joints. The longitudinal reinforcement length in the exterior beam-column joint tests was designed based on the formula for seismic tensile development length of hooked and headed reinforcement bars recommended by previous research (Jian, 2023). Moreover, the study investigated the effects of the presence or absence of transverse reinforcement in beam components and in the joint intersection region of column components on the overall failure mode and seismic performance of the specimens. The column depth configuration in the interior beam-column joint tests complied with the minimum column depth requirement for longitudinal beam reinforcement passing through the joint region as specified in the current American ACI 318-19 code (26d_b). The results were compared with the column depths calculated using the bond-slip model for interior beam-column joints recommended by previous research (Liao, 2017; Liu, 2019), observing the failure modes and performance of the specimens under different concrete strength conditions.
The test results indicated that when the anchorage development length of the beam′s main reinforcement in the exterior beam-column joints was f_y/(65√(f_c^′ )) d_b (in, psi), both hooked and headed reinforcements could provide a deformation capacity of at least 5% inter-story drift angle, with longitudinal beam reinforcement spacing at 2.5d_b, and the strength degradation at the 2nd or 3rd cycle of 4% drift ratio was less than 3%. Furthermore, the study showed that the anchorage length for headed reinforcement could be further reduced by 0.8 times to f_y/(81√(f_c^′ )) d_b (in, psi) without resulting in anchorage failure. Under the same configuration, the presence or absence of transverse reinforcement in beam components did not significantly affect the overall failure mode and deformation performance, but the impact of the absence of column transverse reinforcement in the joint intersection region was quite significant. Regarding the final failure mode of the specimens, the failure mode for specimens with transverse reinforcement in the joint region was beam plastic hinge failure, while for those without column transverse reinforcement, the failure mode was joint shear failure after beam yielding. The specimens still retained a certain level of seismic performance at 4% inter-story drift ratio.
The test results of the interior beam-column joint tests indicated that when the specimens were designed with lower concrete strength (42 MPa) and reinforcement strength grade of SD 550W, the minimum column depth of 26d_b specified by ACI 318-19 could lead to bond-slip phenomena of the beam main reinforcement within the beam-column joint. Additionally, when the specimens were configured with high-strength concrete (70 MPa), the final failure mode of the interior beam-column joint specimens successfully developed into beam plastic hinge failure. This suggests that when longitudinal beam reinforcement passes through the beam-column joint, the influence of concrete strength should be reasonably considered. It is recommended to establish a reasonable design formula for the minimum column depth based on concrete strength to provide sufficient bond capacity in the beam-column joint region, allowing beam components to effectively develop flexural plastic hinges to dissipate seismic energy. |
| 參考文獻 |
[1]ACI Committee 318, (2014, 2019) "Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary. ", American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan.
[2]ACI-ASCE Committee 352, “Recommendations for Design of Beam-Column Connections in Monolithic Reinforced Concrete Structures (ACI 352R-02),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2002, 37 pp.
[3]ASTM A970/A970M-07a, “Standard Specification for Headed Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2007, 6 pp.
[4]ACI Committee 374, “Acceptance Criteria for Moment Frames Based on Structural Testing and Commentary (ACI 374.1-05),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2005, 9 pp.
[5]Chiu, C. K.; Chi, K. N.; and Lin, K. C., (2016), “Experimental investigation on the seismic anchorage behavior of headed bars based on full-size specimens of exterior and interior beam–column joints.” Advances in Structural Engineering, Vol. 19(5), pp.777–794.
[6]Ghimire, K. P., Shao, Y., Darwin, D., and O’Reilly, M., “Conventional and High-Strength Headed Bars – Part 1: Anchorage Tests,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 116, No. 4, May 2019, pp. 255-264.
[7]Kang, T. H.-K.; Shin, M.; Mitra, N.; and Bonacci, J. F., (2009), “Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Beam- Column Joints with Headed Bars,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 106, No. 6, Nov.-Dec., pp. 868-877.
[8]Lee, H. J., and Chang, C. J., (2017), “High-Strength Reinforcement in Exterior Beam-Column Joints under Cyclic Loading.” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 114(5), pp. 1325−1338. DOI: 10.14359/51700788.
[9]Marques, J. L., and Jirsa, J. O., 1975, “A Study of Hooked Bar Anchorages in Beam-Column Joints,” ACI Journal Proceedings, V. 72, No. 5, May, pp. 198-209.
[10]Ou, Y. C., Sutejo, H., Huang, J. L., and Yen, S. I., (2024), “Cyclic Behavior of Beams with Double-Perimeter and Continuous-Stirrup Hoops,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 121(3), pp. 187−200. DOI: 10.14359/51740485.
[11]Popov, E. P.; Bertero, V. V.; and Krawinkler, H., “Cyclic Behavior of Three R/C Flexural Members with High Shear,” EERC Report No. 72-5, Earthquake Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Oct. 1972.
[12]Sperry, J.; Yasso, S.; Searle, N.; DeRubeis, M.; Darwin, D.; O’Reilly, M.; Matamoros, A.; Feldman, L.; Lepage, A.; and Lequesne, R., 2017b,“Conventional and High-Strength Hooked Bars—Part 1: Anchorage Tests,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 114, No. 1, Jan.-Feb., pp. 255-266
[13]Wight, James K., and Sozen, Mete A., “Shear Strength Decay of RC Columns Under Shear Reversals,” Proceedings, ASCE, V.101, ST5, May 1975, pp. 1053-1065.
[14]內政部營建署(2023)，「建築物混凝土結構設計規範」，台北市。
[15]內政部營建署(2024)，「建築物耐震設計規範與解說」，台北市。
[16]中華民國國家標準(CNS，1996)，「金屬材料拉伸試驗法」， CNS 560，中華民國經濟部標準檢驗局，1996。
[17]中華民國國家標準(CNS，2018)，「鋼筋混凝土用鋼筋，Steel bars for concrete reinforcement」，CNS 560，中華民國經濟部標準檢驗局，2018。
[18]中華民國結構工程學會(2022)，「高強度鋼筋混凝土結構設計手冊(第二版)」，科技圖書公司，台北市。
[19]中國土木水利工程學會(2020，2023)，「混凝土工程設計規範與解說」，台北市。
[20]財團法人台灣混凝土學會(2014)，「鋼筋混凝土用鋼筋SD 550-690-790」，台灣。
[21]高文良(2012)，「T頭鋼筋錨定於梁柱接頭之行為研究」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系碩士論文。
[22]許書豪(2014)，「高剪力比鋼筋混凝土梁柱接頭使用擴頭鋼筋錨定之耐震行為研究」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系碩士論文。
[23]趙偉帆(2016)，「使用擴頭鋼筋錨定之高強度鋼筋混凝土梁柱接頭在P-δ效應下耐震行為研究」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系碩士論文。
[24]廖柏州(2017)，「鋼筋與混凝土在反覆載重下之直線拉力握裹行為研究」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系碩士論文。
[25]劉志國(2019)，「鋼筋混凝土梁主筋於內柱梁柱接頭之握裹滑移研究」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系碩士論文。
[26]劉騰嶸(2022)，「柱軸力對鋼筋混凝土梁柱接頭耐震性能之影響」，國立雲林科技大學營建工程系碩士論文。
[27]曹榮升(2023)，「鋼筋混凝土之擴頭鋼筋錨定力學研究」，國立台北科技大學土木工程系土木與防災所碩士論文。
[28]簡育淇(2023)，「梁擴頭鋼筋於梁柱接頭錨定之耐震伸展性能研究」，國立中央大學土木工程學系碩士論文。
[29]林克強(2016)，「使用擴頭鋼筋之外柱梁柱接頭耐震性能」，中華民國結構工程學會，31卷2期，P.25-53。
[30]林克強、紀凱甯、莊勝智、陳勇亲、劉志國（2020），「採用 SD 550W 鋼筋之 RC 構件試驗研究」，國家地震工程研究中心NCREE 技術報告(NCREE-20-007)。
[31]林克強、紀凱甯、莊勝智(2022) ，「RC 梁柱接頭之彎鉤與擴頭鋼筋耐震伸展長度建議」，國家地震工程研究中心年度研究成果報告，P.98-101。
[32]林克強與李宏仁(2023)，「鋼筋混凝土梁柱接頭擴頭鋼筋伸展長度研究」，國家地震工程研究中心研究報告。 |
[Endnote RIS 格式]
[相關文章]
[文章引用]
[完整記錄]
[館藏目錄]
至系統瀏覽論文 (2029-8-1以後開放)
plurk
funp
live
udn
HD
myshare
netvibes
friend
youpush
delicious
baidu
Google bookmarks
del.icio.us
hemidemi
facebook
twitter
google
reddit