Advertisement

International Journal of Steel Structures

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 255–268 | Cite as

Behavior of Partially Concrete Encased Steel Beams Under Cyclic Loading

  • Cheng-Cheng Chen
  • Teguh SudibyoEmail author
  • Erwin
Article
  • 47 Downloads

Abstract

This paper presents an experimental study of the behavior of partially concrete encased steel beams (PE beams) under seismic loading. The effects of a floor slab in providing lateral and torsional support to the strength and ductility of the beam are also investigated herein. One steel beam and six PE beams were tested herein. The strength development in bare steel beam was insufficient and significant lateral torsional buckling (LTB) was observed. The concrete encasement of the PE beam delayed the occurrence of LTB and hence increased the strength and ductility of the beam. The plastic rotation capacity of PE beam is enhanced by the additional lateral and torsional support provided on the top of a PE beam. For the beam tested in this study, the concrete encasement permits the beam to reach its plastic strength and have plastic rotation of at least 3.42% rad, which is larger than 2% rad required for Intermediate Moment Frames, when no lateral or torsional support is provided at the top of the beam. To satisfy the 4% rad plastic rotation limitation for special moment frames, lateral support with sufficient torsional stiffness is needed.

Keywords

Partially concrete encased steel beam Lateral torsional buckling Lateral brace Torsional brace 

References

  1. ACI. (2014). Building code requirement for structural concrete ACI 318-99 . Farmington Hills: American Concrete Institute.Google Scholar
  2. ANSI, AISC 341-16. (2016). Seismic provision for structural steel buildings. Chicago: American Institute of Steel Construction.Google Scholar
  3. ANSI, AISC 360–16. (2016). Specification for structural steel buildings. Chicago: American Institute of Steel Construction.Google Scholar
  4. Chen, S. J. (2001). Design of ductile seismic moment connection, increased beam section method and reduced beam section method. International Journal of Steel Structures, 1, 45–52.Google Scholar
  5. Chen, S. J., Yeh, C. H., & Chu, J. M. (1996). Ductile steel beam-to-column connection for seismic resistance. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 122(11), 95–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, Y., Li, W., & Fang, C. (2017). Performance of partially encased composite beams under static and cyclic bending. Structures, 9, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Nardin, S., & El Debs, A. L. H. (2009). Study of partially encased composite beams with innovative position of stud bolts. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 65(2), 342–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hegger J., & Goralski C. (2005). Structural behavior of partially concrete encased composite sections with high strength concrete. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference in composite construction in steel and concrete (pp. 346–355), South Africa.Google Scholar
  9. Itani, A. M., Cheng, Z., & Saiidi, M. (2004). Cyclic response of steel moment connection for large beam sections using haunch and reduced beam section concepts. International Journal of Steel Structures, 4, 147–155.Google Scholar
  10. Jiang, Y., Hu, X., Hong, W., Gu, M., & Sun, W. (2017). Investigation on partially concrete encased composite beams under hogging moment. Advances in Structural Engineering, 20(3), 461–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jin, J., & El-Tawil, S. (2005). Seismic performance of steel frames with reduced beam section connections. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 61, 453–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kindmann, R., Bergmann, R., Cajot, L.-G., & Scleich, J. B. (1993). Effect of reinforced concrete between the flanges of the steel profile of partially encased composite beams. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 27(1–3), 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kodaira, A., Fujinaka, H., Ohashi, H., & Nishimura, T. (2004). Fire resistance of composite beams composed of rolled steel profile concreted between flanges. Fire Science and Technology, 23(3), 192–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lindner J. & Budassis N. (2000). Lateral torsional buckling of partially encased composite beams without concrete slab. In Proceedings of composite construction in steel and concrete IV conference, The United Engineering Foundation ASCE (pp. 117–128), Canada.Google Scholar
  15. Nakamura, S., & Narita, N. (2003). Bending and shear strengths of partially encased composite I-girders. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 59, 1435–1453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Piloto P. A. G., Gavilan A. B. R., Mesquita L. M. R., & Goncalves C. (2012). High temperature tests on partially encased beams. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on structures in fire, Zurich, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  17. Piloto, P. A. G., Gavilan, A. B. R., Zipponi, M., Marini, A., Mesquita, L. M. R., & Plizzari, G. (2013). Experimental investigation of the fire resistance of partially encased beams. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 80, 121–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Plumier, A. (1994). Behavior of connections. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 29, 95–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Steel Construction 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Construction EngineeringNational Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyDa’an Dist., Taipei CityTaiwan (ROC)
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversitas Gadjah MadaYogyakartaIndonesia

Personalised recommendations