A traditional reinforcing detail—hooked bars anchored in the joint core—for the bottom bars in precast beams was improved by using small-diameter high-strength bars to reduce the steel congestion in the cast-in-place connection zone. Five full-scale beam-to-column connections, including a monolithic specimen, were tested under reversed cyclic loading. The primary test variables were the type of beam longitudinal bars, manner of roughening the inner surface of the precast U-shell, presence or absence of the small-diameter stirrups inside the U-shell, and height of the precast columns. An analysis of the strength, ductility, stiffness, and energy dissipation showed that the proposed connection exhibited a comparable, although slightly inferior, seismic performance relative to the monolithic connection. Among the precast specimens, the existence of additional stirrups slightly improved the total performance. The use of high-strength steel bars as beam top longitudinal bars further decreased the loading capacity and energy dissipation. The air bubble film technique used to roughen the interfaces ensured the structural integrity.
AlcocerSMCarranzaRPerez-NavarreteD, et al. (2002) Seismic tests of beam-to-column connections in a precast concrete frame. PCI Journal47(3): 70–89.
2.
BeattieGJ (1989) Recent testing of precast structural components at central laboratories. In: Proceedings of the New Zealand Concrete Society Conference, Conference technical papers TR9, Wairakei, New Zealand, 11–15 October, pp. 111–118.
CaiJGFengJWangZ, et al. (2009) Experiment study on seismic behavior of middle joints of SCOPE system. Journal of Central South University: Science and Technology43(2): 136–140 (in Chinese).
5.
CEB-FIP (Model Code) (2010) Fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010. Hamburg: Ernst & Sohn GmbH & Co. KG.
6.
ChangBHutchinsonTWangX, et al. (2014) Seismic performance of beam-column subassemblies with high-strength steel reinforcement. ACI Structural Journal111(6): 1329–1338.
7.
ChenSCYanWMGaoJ (2012) Experimental investigation on the seismic performance of large-scale interior beam-column joints with composite slab. Advances in Structural Engineering15(7): 1227–1237.
8.
ChunSCChoiCSJungHS (2017) Side-face blowout failure of large-diameter high-strength headed bars in beam-column joints. ACI Structural Journal114(1): 161–171.
9.
DGJ32/TJ 202-2016 (2016) Technical Specification for Application of Heat-Treatment High-strength Ribbed Bar in Concrete Structures. Nanjing, China: Jiangsu Phoenix Science and Technology Press (in Chinese).
10.
ErtasOOzdenSOzturanT (2006) Ductile connections in precast concrete moment resisting frames. PCI Journal51(3): 66–76.
11.
GB/T 228.1-2010 (2010) Metallic Materials-Tensile Testing-Part 1: Method of Test at Room Temperature (ISO 6892-1:2009).Beijing, China: China Standard Press (in Chinese).
12.
GB 50010-2010 (2010) Code for Design of Concrete Structures. Beijing, China: China Architecture & Building Press (in Chinese).
13.
GB 50011-2016 (2016) Code for Seismic Design of Buildings. Beijing, China: China Architecture & Building Press (in Chinese).
14.
GB/T 50081-2012 (2012) Standard for Test Method of Mechanical Properties on Ordinary Concrete. Beijing, China: China Architecture & Building Press (in Chinese).
15.
GuanDZGuoZXXiaoQD, et al. (2016) Experimental study of a new beam-to-column connection for precast concrete frames under reversal cyclic loading. Advances in Structural Engineering19(3): 529–545.
16.
GuanDZJiangCGuoZX, et al. (2018) Development and seismic behavior of precast concrete beam-to-column connections. Journal of Earthquake Engineering22(2): 234–256.
17.
HaSSKimSHLeeMS, et al. (2014) Performance evaluation of semi precast concrete beam-column connections with U-shaped strands. Advances in Structural Engineering17(11): 1585–1600.
18.
HoseYDSeibleF (1999) Performance evaluation database for concrete bridge components and systems under simulated seismic loads. Technical Report PEER 1999/11. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
19.
HwangHJParkHGChoiWS, et al. (2014) Cyclic loading test for beam-column connections with 600 MPa beam flexural reinforcing bars. ACI Structural Journal111(4): 913–924.
20.
ImHJParkHGEomTS (2013) Cyclic loading test for reinforced-concrete-emulated beam-column connection of precast concrete moment frame. ACI Structural Journal110(1): 115–125.
21.
Joint Technical Committee BD-084 (2001) AS/NZS 4671 Steel Reinforcing Materials. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Standards Australia International Ltd.; Wellington, New Zealand: Standards New Zealand.
22.
KuramaYCSritharanSFleischmanRB, et al. (2018) Seismic-resistant precast concrete structures: state of the art. Journal of Structural Engineering144(4): 3118001.
23.
LeeHJChangCJ (2017a) High-strength reinforcement in exterior beam-column joints under cyclic loading. ACI Structural Journal114(5): 1325–1338.
24.
LeeHJChenHCSyuJH (2017b) Seismic performance of emulative precast concrete beam-column connections with alternative reinforcing details. Advances in Structural Engineering20(12): 1793–1806.
25.
ParasteshHHajirasoulihaIRamezaniR (2014) A new ductile moment-resisting connection for precast concrete frames in seismic regions: an experimental investigation. Engineering Structures70: 144–157.
26.
ParkR (1995) A perspective on the seismic design of precast concrete structures in New Zealand. PCI Journal40(3): 40–60.
27.
RestrepoJIParkRBuchananAH (1995) Tests on connections of earthquake resisting precast reinforced-concrete perimeter frames of buildings. PCI Journal40(4): 44–61.
28.
ZhangJXRongXLiuP (2017a) Deformation behavior of interior joints with 600 MPa reinforcement steel bar and high toughness concrete. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Dynamics37(2): 165–172 (in Chinese).
29.
ZhangJXRongXWuHC (2017b) Experimental research on hysteretic behavior of exterior joints with 600 MPa reinforced bars. Industrial Construction47(6): 30–33 (in Chinese).
