Experimental study on behavior of Retrofitted with FRP ... experimental investigation of the behavior of retrofitted FRP wrapped exterior beam-column joints with detailing as per IS

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

Volume 1, No 1, 2010

© Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing services

Research Article ISSN 0976 – 4399

64

Experimental study on behavior of Retrofitted with FRP wrapped RC Beam-

Column Exterior Joints Subjected to cyclic loading

E. Senthil kumar 1

A.Murugesan2

G.S.Thirugnanam 3

1 Post Graduate student, 3 Assistant Professor and Head

Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Road and Transport Technology, Erode-638316,

Tamil Nadu, India.

2 Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Sona College of technology, salem-

636005

[email protected]

doi:10.6088/ijcser.00202010006

ABSTRACT

In the last few decades, moderate and severe earthquake have struck different places in

the world, causing severe damage to reinforced concrete (RC) Structures. Retrofitting of existing

structures is one of the major challenges that modern civil engineering structures has

demonstrated that most of them will need major repairs in the near future. Up gradation to higher

seismic zones of several cities and towns in the country has also associated in evolving new

retrofitting strategies. One of the techniques of strengthening of the RC structural members is

through confinement with a composite enclosure. This external confinement of concrete by high

strength fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) composite can significantly enhance the strength and

ductility and will result in large energy absorption capacity of structural members. FRP material,

which are available in the form of sheet, are being used to strengthen a variety of RC elements to

enhance the flexural, shear, and axial load carrying capacity of these elements.

An experimental investigation of the behavior of retrofitted FRP wrapped exterior beam-

column joints with detailing as per IS 13920 : 1993 under seismic conditions is presented. The

experimental study on exterior beam-column joint of a multistory reinforced concrete building

(G+ 4 storey) in Salem Zone falling under the seismic Zone – III has been analyzed using

STADD.pro. The specimens were designed for seismic load according to IS 1893(Part-I): 2002

& IS 13920: 1993. The test specimen is reduced to one fifth model of beam column joint from

prototype specimen. Column confinement and beam stirrups are provided closely in joint region

according to IS 13920 : 1993. Three Specimens were cast and tested to failure during the present

investigation. One is Control specimen test up to post ultimate load, and another two Specimen

test up to 70% of the ultimate Load. The test specimens were evaluated in terms of load-

displacement relation, ductility, stiffness, load ratio and cracking pattern. Test results are

compared with analytical modeling of beam column joint performed in STAAD.Pro. and

ANSYS Software.

Keywords: FRP, Retro fitting, STADD Pro





65

1 Introduction

Recent Earthquake have exposed the Vulnerability of existing reinforce concrete (RC)

beam- column joints to seismic loading. Until early 1990s, concrete jacketing and steel were the

two common methods adopted for strengthening the deficient RC Beam column Joints. Concrete

jacketing results in substantial increase in the cross section are and self jackets are poor in

resisting weather attacks. Both methods are however labor intensive and sometimes difficult to

implement at site. A new technique has emerged recently which uses fiber reinforced polymer

sheet to strengthen the beam- column joint. FRP materials have a number of favorable

characteristics such as ease to install, immunity to corrosion, high strength, availability in sheets

etc. The simplest way to strengthen such joints is to attach FRP sheets in the joint region in two

orthogonal directions.

In RC buildings, portions of columns that are common to beams at their intersections are

called beam-column joints. Since their constituent materials have limited strengths, the joints

have limited force carrying capacity. When forces larger than these are applied during

earthquakes, joints are severely damaged. Repairing damaged joints is difficult, and so damage

must be avoided. Thus, beam-column joints must be designed to resist earthquake effects. Under

earthquake shaking, the beams adjoining a joint are subjected to moments in the same (clockwise

or counterclockwise) direction. Under these moments, the top bars in the beam-column joint are

pulled in one direction and the bottom ones in the opposite direction. These forces are balanced

by bond stress developed between concrete and steel in the joint region. If the column is not wide

enough or if the strength of concrete in the joint is low, there is insufficient grip of concrete on

the steel bars. In such circumstances, the bar slips inside the joint region, and beams lose their

capacity to carry load. Further, under the action of the above pull-push forces at top and bottom

ends, joints undergo geometric distortion; one diagonal length of the joint elongates and the other

compresses. If the column cross-sectional size is insufficient, the concrete in the joint develops

diagonal cracks.

Problems of diagonal cracking and crushing of concrete in the joint region can be

controlled by two mean, namely providing large column sizes and providing closely spaced

closed-loop steel ties around column bars in the joint region. The ties hold together the concrete

in the joint and also resist shear force, thereby reducing the cracking and crushing of concrete.

Providing closed-loop ties in the joint requires some extra effort. Indian Standard IS:13920-1993

recommends continuing the transverse loops around the column bars through the joint region. In

practice, this is achieved by preparing the cage of the reinforcement (both longitudinal bars and

stirrups) of all beams at a floor level to be prepared on top of the beam formwork of that level

and lowered into the cage. However, this may not always be possible particularly when the

beams are long and the entire reinforcement cage becomes heavy.

The gripping of beam bars in the joint region is improved first by using columns of

reasonably large cross-sectional size. As explained in Earthquake Tip 19, the Indian Standard

IS:13920-1993 requires building columns in seismic zones III, IV and V to be at least 300 mm

wide in each direction of the cross-section when they support beams that are longer than 5m or

when these columns are taller than 4m between floors (or beams). The American Concrete





66

Institute recommends a column width of at least 20 times the diameter of largest longitudinal bar

used in adjoining beam. In exterior joints where beams terminate at columns, longitudinal beam

bars need to be anchored into the column to ensure proper gripping of bar in joint. The length of

anchorage for a bar of grade Fe415 (characteristic tensile strengths of 415MPa) is about 50 times

its diameter. This length is measured from the face of the column to the end of the bar anchored

in the column. In columns of small widths and when beam bars are of large diameter, a portion

of beam top bar is embedded in the column that is cast up to the soffit of the beam, and a part of

it overhangs. It is difficult to hold such an overhanging beam top bar in position while casting the

column up to the soffit of the beam. On the other hand, if column width is large, the beam bars

may not extend below the soffit of the beam. Thus, it is preferable to have columns with

sufficient width. Such an approach has been used in the American practice [ACI1318M, 2002].

2 Experimental investigation

The experimental study on exterior beam-column joint of a multistory reinforced

concrete building in Salem Zone falling under the seismic Zone – III has been analyzed using

STADD.pro. The specimens were designed for seismic load according to IS 1893(Part-I): 2002

& IS 13920: 1993. The structure is five storey two bay frames including 1.5 m foundation depth.

The maximum moment is occurred at the ground floor roof level. We consider that particular

joint for the experimental study.

Fig.1. Two bay 5 storey Frame with seismic force X & Z Directions.

2.1 Details of specimen

The test specimen was reduced to 1/5th

scale to suit the loading arrangement and test

facilities. Prototype specimen having beam dimension of 305 X 460 including slab thickness and

column dimension of 305 X 460. For testing model the dimension of beam was 120 X 170 mm





67

with out slab thickness and beam length of 450mm and that column size was 120 X 230 mm.

Height of the column was 600mm.

Fig 2: Ductile Detailing of Beam Column Joint as per IS 13920; 1993

2.2 Description of the formwork and reinforcement

Fig 3: Formwork and Reinforcement for Test specimen

Fig 4 : Casting Beam-Column Joint





68

2.3 Reinforcement details

The reinforcement details of beam column joint are shown in fig.2. Main reinforcement

provided in the beam was 10 mm diameter bars, 3 Nos at top and 3 Nos at bottom. The stirrups

are 6 mm diameter bars at 30 mm c/c for a distance of 2d, i.e. 300 mm from the face of the

column and at 60 mm c/c for remaining length of the beam. The longitudinal reinforcement

provided in the column was 8 No’s of 8 mm diameter bars equally distributed along four sides of

column. The column confinements are 6 mm diameter bars at 30 mm c/c for a distance of 150

mm from the face of the column and at 60 mm c/c for remaining length of the column.

2.4 Casting and curing

The mould is arranged properly and placed over a smooth surface. The sides of the mould

exposed to concrete were oiled well to prevent the side walls of the mould from absorbing water

from concrete and to facilitate easy removal of the specimen. The reinforcement cages were

placed in the moulds and cover between cage and form provided was 20 mm. Concrete mix

designed for M30 ( 1:1:2.5) and water cement ratio is 0.40. Cement mortar block pieces were

used as cover blocks. The concrete contents such as cement, sand, aggregate and water were

weighed accurately and mixed. The mixing was done till uniform mix was obtained. The

concrete was placed into the mould immediately after mixing and well compacted. Control cubes

and cylinders were prepared for all the mixes along with concreting. The test specimens were

remolded at the end of 24 hours of casting. They were marked identifications. They are cured in

water for 28 days. After 28 days of curing the specimen was dried in air and white washed.

Fig 5: Test Setup for Cyclic Loading for Control Specimen





69

2.5 Test setup and instrumentation

The specimen was tested in a reaction frame. The test setup is shown in figure 4. A

hydraulic jack was used to apply the axial load for column. To record the load precisely a

proving ring was used. The load is applied forward cyclic and reverse cyclic and deflection

measured from every 3 KN by using LVDT. The deflection was measured at the beam free end

tip. Loading is applied gradually such as 3,6,9,12,15 KN respectively for forward direction and -

3,-6,-9,-12,-15 KN respectively for reverse direction.

Fig 6 : Load Vs Displacement curve subjected to cyclic loading for Control Specimen

Fig 7 : Failure due to Ultimate Load for Control Specimen





70

Fig 8 : Maximum Stress and Crack Pattern due to ultimate load

2.6 Comparison between experimental study and FEM analysis

Experimental results are compared with FEM model analysis in stadd.pro, the behavior of

the exterior beam column joint are similar. Maximum stresses are occurred at the junction for the

ultimate loading at the beam tip. The crack pattern are formed and clearly visible in the model as

shown in fig: 7. The maximum stress are developed in the FEM model at junction the tensile

stress at top exceed the maximum tensile stress and compressive stress occurred at bottom in the

forward cyclic loading as shown in fig: 8.

Fig : 9 Plastic hinge formation at junction after ultimate load





71

2.7 Preparation of Retrofitted Specimens

Fig 10: Preparation of Retrofitted Specimens

The Exterior beam column joint specimen named as SL-1 (Single Layer) & DL-2

(Double Layer) was tested subject to quasi- static cyclic loading simulating earthquake loads.

The Load was applied by using screw jack totally 5 cycle were imposed. The beam-column joint

was gradually loaded by increasing the load level during each cycle. The load sequence consists

of 3kN, 6kN, 9kN and upto 70% ultimate load. The deflection measured at tip during the cycle of

loading. As the load level was increased in each cycle.

2.8 Load Carrying Capacity

The first crack was witnessed during 4th

cycle at the load level of 17.0kN. As the load

level was increased, further cracks were developed in other portions. The 70% of ultimate load

carrying capacity of the SL-1 & DL -2 specimens was 20.0kN recorded at 5th

cycle.

After the testing of the two specimens the cracks are filled with the fiber glass paste

mixed with unsaturated polyester resin. The surface area was covered with help of fiber glass

paste in all direction as shown in Fig. The Spalling of the concrete portion are filled with this

fiber glass paste.

2.9 Wrapping of GFRP mat with Resin

Glass fiber mat class-E grade 300 (chopped Fiber) was used to wrapping the specimens

the mat are cut into desired shape. The Unsaturated Polyester resin with accelerator of Cobalt 6%

and catalyst of .01% was added with resin mix thoroughly. The Fiber glass mat placed over the

specimen and the resin was applied uniformly in all direction with help of brush. Single Layer

thickness was applied to the specimen of EXT-1, Double Layer Thickness was applied to the

Specimen of EXT -2. The specimens are allowed to dry in the room temperature up to 16 Hr.





72

Fig 11 : Load setup for the retrofitted specimens for SL-1 & DL-2

2.10 Loading and load deflection behavior

The GFRP wrapped specimen was subjected to quasi-static cyclic loading simulating

earthquake loads. The history of load sequence followed for the test was presented in figure 12.

The load was applied by using screw jack Totally 14 cycles were imposed. The cyclic load

versus deflection was presented in figure

Fig 12: Load sequence Diagram





73

Fig 13. Load Vs Deflection curve for Retrofitted Specimen

Fig 14 : Ductility Factor for Forward and reverse Cycle for Control Specimen





74

Fig: 15 Cumulative Energy Absorption for Forward and Reverse Loading for Control

Specimen

Fig: 16 Relative Energy Absorption for Forward and Reverse Loading

for Control Specimen





75

Fig: 17 Ductility Factor for Forward and Reverse Loading for Control Specimen

Fig: 18 Stiffness Degradation for Forward and Reverse Loading for Control Specimen





76

Fig: 19 Comparison of Load Carrying Capacity for Control & Retrofitted Specimens

Fig: 20 Comparison of Ductility factor for Control & Retrofitted Specimens





77

Fig: 21 Comparison of Cumulative Ductility for Control & Retrofitted Specimens

Fig 22 : Comparison of Relative Energy Absorption for Control & Retrofitted Specimens





78

Fig 23 : Comparison of Cumulative Relative Energy Absorption for Control & Retrofitted

Specimens

3 Conclusion

Beam column joint in the moment resisting frame have traditionally beam neglected in

design process while the individual connected elements, that is, beam and column, have received

considerable attention in design. Research on beam column joint of reinforced concrete moment

resisting frame was started only in the 1970s. The 1993 version of IS 13920 – 1993 incorporated

some provision on the design of beam column joints. However, the Provisions are inadequate to

prevents shear and bond failure of beam column joint in severe seismic shaking. Therefore, these

provisions need to be upgraded substantially with inclusion of explicit provisions on shear design

and anchorage requirement. This article proposes provision for shear design of beam column

joint and anchorage requirements of tension beam bars in the joint area. It also suggests

provisions for the confinement of wide beam and column connections. The plastic hinge

formation at the joint after the ultimate load.

The structural behavior of RCC beam column joint exterior type has been studied

analytically by using standard software packages STAAD Pro and ANSYS.

Experimental investigation has been carried out and the test results show that the

structural behavior of exterior beam column joint model has been similar to that of the

analytically predicted one.

The Loading Carrying capacity of the retrofitted Specimen is 60% More than that of the

Control Specimen.

The Load Deformation characteristics also improved to large extent in the case of the

Retrofitted specimen over the control specimen.

The enhancement in the energy absorption capacity of the retrofitted specimen was in the

rang of 30% - 60% over the control specimen.

The Failure was in the column Portion of the joint for the control specimen which is to be

avoided. In case of the Retrofitted specimen the failure was noticed in the beam portion

only and the column was intact and this is the most preferred type of failure under

seismic load which will prevent progressive collapse of the structure.





79

4 Reference

1. Hung-Jen Lee and Si-Ying Yu “Cyclic Response of Exterior Beam-Column Joints with

Different Anchorage Methods” The ACI structural Journal, Title No.106-S32, May-

June 2009.

2. A.G.Tsonos, I.A.Tegos and G.Gr.Penelis “Seismic resistance of Type 2 Exterior Beam

column joints reinforced with inclined bars” The ACI structural Journal, Title No.89-

S1, Jan-Feb 1992.

3. G. Appa Rao, M.Mahajan, M.Gangaram and Rolf Eligehausen “Performance of non-

seismically designed RC beam column joints strengthened by various schemes

subjected to seismic loads”, Journal of structural engineering, V.35, No.1, Apr-May

2008, pp 52-58.

4. Murthy C.V.R, Durgesh C.Rai, K.K.Bajpai and Sudhir.K.jain, “Anchorage Details and

Joint Design in Seismic RC Frames”, the Indian Concrete Journal, April 2001, pp 274 –

280.

5. G.S.Thirugnanam “Ductile Behavior Of FRP Strengthened R.C Beams Subjected To

Cyclic Loading” IRTT Erode.

6. A.Murugesan and Dr.G.S.Thirugnanam “Ductile Behavior of Steel Fiber Reinforced

Concrete beam-column joints subjected to Cyclic loading”, National Conference on

Advances and Innovations in civil Engineering, Mepco Schlenk Engineering

College,Sivakasi (2009),pp 27-33.

7. A.Murugesan and Dr.G.S.Thirugnanam“Ductile behavior Reinforced Concrete Beam -

Column joints Subjected to Cyclic loading”, National Conference on Recent Advances

in Concrete, Steel and Composite Structures , I.R.T.T., Erode (2009),pp .118-135

Documents

Experimental study on behavior of Retrofitted with FRP ... experimental investigation of the behavior of retrofitted FRP wrapped exterior beam-column joints with detailing as per IS