Mechanical modeling of semi-rigid joints for the analysis of framed steel and composite structures

Tschemmernegg, F; Queiroz, Gilson

doi:10.1016/b978-008042821-5/50081-x

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After that this method was further developed by a number of researchers. Tschemmernegg carried out a series of works for modelling welded and bolted bare-steel end plate connections [13,14]. The research studies conducted by Jaspart [15] from the University of Liége, Belgium, should be mentioned, in which the available component data were combined as a practical design concept for connections at ambient temperature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Component-based steel beam–column connections modelling for dynamic progressive collapse analysis

Liu

Tan

Fung

2015

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Component-based steel beam–column connections modelling for dynamic progressive collapse analysis

Liu

Tan

Fung

2015

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Nevertheless, the recent application of 3D Laser Cutting Technology (3D-LCT) in Civil Engineering [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] has allowed the fabrication of welded connections by precisely cutting the tubular profile with the imprint of the cross-section shape of the double-tee beam or plate. The Component Method (CM) is an advanced strategy to predict the stiffness and strength of steel beam-to-column joints [8] , [9] , [10] , [11] . This approach requires identifying and characterising individual nodal components in terms of strength and stiffness to model the connection's monotonic moment-rotation response.…”

Section: Value Of the Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Component Method (CM) is an advanced strategy to predict the stiffness and strength of steel beam-to-column joints [8] , [9] , [10] , [11] . This approach requires identifying and characterising individual nodal components in terms of strength and stiffness to model the connection's monotonic moment-rotation response.…”

Section: Value Of the Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental and Finite Element Data of T-joints with Circular-Hollow-Section chord members

Benedetto,

Latour,

Rizzano

2024

Data in Brief

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, the deteriorating behavior of the shear stud connectors was disregarded. Other modeling approaches include the component method 21 which is suitable for system‐level nonlinear simulations of MRFs with composite floor slabs. However, this method has been mainly used to simulate the behavior of partially‐restrained beam‐to‐column connections 22–24 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proposed nonlinear macro‐model for seismic risk assessment of composite‐steel moment resisting frames

Jisr

Kohrangi²,

Lignos

2022

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a macro‐model for simulating the hysteretic behavior of composite‐steel beams as part of fully restrained beam‐to‐column connections in composite‐steel moment‐resisting frames (MRFs). Comparisons with experimental data suggest that the proposed model captures the asymmetric hysteretic response of composite‐steel beams including the cyclic deterioration in strength and stiffness. Moreover, the proposed model captures the primary slab‐column force transfer mechanisms and predicts the slip demands in beam‐slab connections under inelastic cyclic loading. The modeling approach is employed in a system‐level study to benchmark the seismic collapse risk of composite‐steel MRF buildings across Europe. Moreover, the beam‐slab slip demands are quantified through the development of beam‐slab slip hazard curves. The simulation studies suggest that the examined composite‐steel MRFs exhibit a system overstrength of about 4. This is attributed to the drift requirements in the current European seismic provisions.1 The annualized probability of collapse of the prototype buildings is well below 1% over a 50‐year building life expectancy regardless of the design site and the degree of composite action. Beam‐slab connections with a partial degree of composite action experience minimal damage for frequently occurring seismic events (i.e., 50% probability of exceedance over 50 years); and light cracking in the slab for a design basis earthquake. The above are important from a seismic repairability standpoint. Accordingly, it is recommended that the 25% reduction in the shear resistance of stud connectors is not imperative for seismic designs that feature steel beams with depths less than 500 mm.

show abstract

Mechanical modeling of semi-rigid joints for the analysis of framed steel and composite structures

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Component-based steel beam–column connections modelling for dynamic progressive collapse analysis

Component-based steel beam–column connections modelling for dynamic progressive collapse analysis

Experimental and Finite Element Data of T-joints with Circular-Hollow-Section chord members

Proposed nonlinear macro‐model for seismic risk assessment of composite‐steel moment resisting frames

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About