Document Sample

Post-Yield Stiffness Effects on Moment Redistribution in Continuous Reinforced Concrete Beams By Pedro Silva, Ph.D., P.E. R W einforced concrete (RC) beams of the type shown in Figure 1 are commonly designed using ® moment redistribution principles. RC E continuous beams or plane frames may have any number of spans or boundary R restraints; the work presented in this ar- ticle is for a simply supported, two-span, L L continuous RC beam, but many of the A B C U conclusions can be extrapolated to other situations. In design, these continuous Figure 1: Two-span continuous beam under uniform loads. t h yrig T members are typically assumed to dis- play an elasto-plastic response, which Cop Theµrelationships of MR intensile ductility, φ, as a function of strain. terms deforming plastically at end B when the moment and curvature reach Mn and means that after yielding of the tension C of tensile strain and curvature ductility φy, respectively. After this stage, the in- steel any increase in stiffness due to are outlined in Figure 2. cremental uniform applied load on the strain hardening is neglected. In reality, Formulation of MR as a function of 7.5% will impose t ≤ 20% beam ≤ MR = 1000 inelastic rotations and 1 e beams subjected to large inelastic strain U curvature ductility capacity is presented curvatures at support B. The amount of levels may attain a significant post-yield n in terms of the moment curvature (M-φ) MR that the beam can sustain is computed stiffness, which has a strong effect on the i relationships and the statically indeter- as follows: R moment redistribution of continuous 1 z minate beam shown in Figure 3, which RC beams. is a simplified version for the analysis of the MR = 1 − 1 + 3λ μφ − 1 Equation 2 2 T In this article, the basics of moment a two-span beam shown in Figure 1. The redistribution are discussed as a function Modeling the inelastic response of the beam is uniformly loaded and is pinned g of curvature ductility capacity using finite S and fixed at ends A and B, respectively. beam in terms of Release 2 follows the element subroutines. The author further 1 bilinear1 M-φ relationship presented in a Under an increasing load, the beam will illustrates the principles of moment redis- deform elastically up to yielding and then MR = − 1 The beam φ − 1 Figure 3(a).+ 3λ + r μbegins to deform 3 tribution in the design of a two-span RC plastically at end Β when the moment plastically at end B. m continuous beam, including the potential 7.5% ≤ MR = 1000 reach M , and1 , respec- and curvature t ≤ 20% y φy For the nonlinear part of the analysis, effects of post-yield stiffness. tively. After this stage, the beam develops two released structures may be considered. Structural DeSign For Release 1 the beam is considered per- plastic rotations and curvatures that include Basics of Moment fectly plastic at end B, and in Release 2 the post-yield 1 stiffness and plastic hinge Redistribution the beam can be considered restrained 2 MR = 1 Following similar steps, in Release length. − 1 + 3λ μφ − 1 by a plastic rotational spring with the 2 the amount of MR that the beam can Sections 8.4.1 and 8.4.3 of ACI 318- stiffness, β, idealized in terms of the sustain is computed as follows: 05 state that the level of moment re- distribution (MR) that is permitted in a post-yield stiffness, r; initial stiffness, EI; 1 continuous RC beam is: and plastic hinge length as a function of MR = 1 − 1 + 3λ + r μφ − 1 3 Equation 3 beam span length, λL. 7.5% MR=1000εt 20% Equation 1 Modeling the inelastic response of the Equations 2 and 3 can be used to com- where εt is the level of strain in the ex- beam in terms of Release 1 follows the pute the amount of MR that a beam can treme tension reinforcement. As such, elasto-plastic idealization presented in sustain as a function of the plastic hinge this strain must be at least 0.0075 be- Figure 3(a). The beam is assumed to begin length, post-yield stiffness and curvature fore MR is permitted. The permissible levels of MR defined by Equation 1 are 25 25 design issues for structural engineers conservative, and results derived from Moment Redistribution (%) Moment Redistribution (%) this study show that strain levels will in 20 20 many cases fall significantly below 0.005, which violates the ACI 318-05 limit for 15 15 a tension-controlled design. Stipulated by Equation 1, the amounts of MR that 10 ACI 318 10 can be allowed in the design of continu- permissible Proposed 5 MR as a 5 MR as a ous RC beams are only expressed as a function of t function of µ φ function of tensile strains. Because of its 0 0 generality, the work presented in this ar- 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ticle will evaluate MR in RC structures Steel Strain, t Curvature Ductility, µφ as a function of curvature ductility ca- (a) (b) pacity. Previously the author has derived an expression to obtain the curvature Figure 2: Moment redistribution (a) Function of εt, (b) Function of µφ. STRUCTURE magazine 18 January 2010 w From the moment-curvature analysis, the φy φp curvature ductility capacity of the section is nearly µφ≈6.5. From Figure 2(b) this ductility Elasto- L capacity translates into a MR capacity of Mu Plastic 15.7%. Comparatively, for Release 1 the MR A Structural Model B that the section can develop is 12.1%. On the Mn dw other hand, for Release 2 the two-span beam My / can now develop a much greater MR=61.2%. ® rEI θp This simple example clearly shows that the E actual MR that the beam can develop is sig- Moment Release 1: Perfectly Plastic nificantly higher than what is allowed by ACI Bilinear R = rEI L p 318. Figure 6 (page 20) shows the moment EI dw profiles for three cases. One curve shows the profiles considering the elastic design condition, φy U φu / θp another corresponds to r=0, and the third rep- Curvature, φ Release 2: Bilinear resents r=0.035. It is not apparent from these ht yrig T curves the salient differences between a design (a) M- Idealization p Co(b) Uniform Load, w that considers r=0 and the actual response of Figure 3: Basics of moment redistribution. the beam with r=0.035. C continued on next page ductility capacity. Obviously, these principles Some other trends of the MR levels presented of MR capacity only apply to the beam geom- in Figure 4 are as follows: (i) as the post-yield 12 in. e U etry presented in Figure 1. stiffness ratio increases, so does MR; (ii) as the n The permissible levels of MR in two-span plastic hinge length increases, so does MR; i continuous beams that correspond to the two (iii) the curve for r=0.00 and λ=0.01 follows R releases are depicted graphically in Figure 4. below the permissible MR curve computed The post-yield stiffness (r) and plastic hinge based on Equation 1, and depicted in Figure z #4 Stirrups T a length (λL) have a marked effect on the MR 2. The next section presents the effects that @ 6 in o.c. 21.6 in. 24 in. capacity of two-span continuous beams. It these trends have on the actual performance g S is envisioned that this same observation will of beams designed using MR principles. also apply to other continuous structures. a Design and #5 Top & Bottom m Performance Evaluation 40.0 As discussed, the levels of MR that can be MR Permissible Moment Redistribution (%) achieved in continuous beams depend strictly r = 0.00 & = 0.01 (a) Beam Cross-Section 30.0 on the plasticr rotation capacity of members Release 1 = 0.00 & = 0.02 Curvature Ductility, µφ r = In this = 0.04 at plastic hinges. 0.00 & section, a design ex- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 20.0 r 0.00 & = to investigate the ample has been=established 0.08 200 r = 0.05 stiffness has effects that post-yield & = 0.01 on MR. r = parameters Reflecting the 0.05 & = 0.02 of Table 1, 160 Moment (kips-ft) 10.0 Release 2 required a beam with the cross-section design r = 0.05 & = 0.04 dimensions and=reinforcement layout shown r 0.05 & = 0.08 120 0.0 in Figure 5(a), which consists of 6-#5 (Grade 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 60) top and bottom bars. The moment- 80 Release 1: r = 0.00 Curvature Ductility, µφ curvature analysis for this section is presented 40 Release 2: r = 0.035 in Figure 5(b). The solid curve is the moment- curvature section analysis that is used to 0 MR Permissible evaluate the performance of the two-span 0.0000 0.0005 0.0010 0.0015 r = 0.00 & = 0.01 continuous RC beam under Release 2 with Curvature (1/in.) r = 0.00 & = 0.02 (b) Moment - Curvature Relations Release 1 r=0.035. The dashed curve is for the same r = 0.00 & = 0.04 evaluation under Release 1 with r=0. It is im- Figure 5: Cross Section Dimensions and r = 0.00 & = 0.08 portant to emphasize that in current practice, Capacity Analysis. r = 0.05 & = 0.01 r=0 is generally assumed for design. r = 0.05 & = 0.02 Release 2 r = 0.05 & = 0.04 Span length = 20 feet Steel bars required = 6-#5 (Grade 60) r = 0.05 & = 0.08 Uniform dead load = 900 plf Uniform Live Load = 1400 plf Dead load factor = 1.2 Live load factor = 1.6 .0 10.0 Figure 4: Moment redistribution versus ductility. Ultimate factored load = 3,320 plf MR per ACI (6-#5) = 15.7% for µφ Release 1: With r=0, MR = 12.1% Release 2: With r=0.035, MR = 61.2% Table 1: Design Parameters. STRUCTURE magazine 19 January 2010 200 1.4 Elastic Design Mu Bending Moment (kips-ft) 1.2 r = 0.00 Ratio of Demand/Capacity Elasto-Plastic r = 0.00 Design (r = 0) Mn 100 M'y 1.0 r = 0.035 0.8 ® 0 0.6 E 0.4 r = 0.035 M'y r = 0.035 0.2 R -100 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 U Location from end A to B (x/L) Plastic Rotations Tension Strains ht yrig T Cop Figure 6: Moment profiles for end spans A-B. Figure 7: Ratio of Demand versus Capacity. C Future Investigations Figure 7 shows the ratio of the plastic rotation This article presented some of the basics of Pedro Silva, Ph.D., P.E. and tensile strain demand versus capacity. moment redistribution principles and ap- e U (silvap@gwu.edu), is an For r=0, demand exceeds the section plastic plied them to a two-span continuous RC Associate Professor in the Civil n rotation and tensile strain capacity by a ratio beam. Results show that post-yield stiffness & Environmental Engineering i R of 1.02 and 1.3, respectively. For r=0.035, has a marked effect, an important observation Department at The George z there is a drastic decrease in the demand versus that should be investigated in further detail Washington University in capacity ratio to 0.10 and 0.25, indicating for structures that have a higher order of in- T Washington DC. His research that the degree of conservatism is on the order of 10. These ratios show that post-yield a determinacy. Issues of moment redistribution g for continuous beams with a number of spans interests include analysis and design of structures subject to S stiffness has a marked effect on the moment greater than two and plane frames will be un- seismic and blast loading. a redistribution of continuous RC beams. dertaken in the future.▪ m ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org STRUCTURE magazine 20 January 2010

DOCUMENT INFO

Shared By:

Categories:

Tags:
Royal Wedding, Current Issue, April 29, Kate Middleton, Table of Contents, How to, Celebrity News, April 24, Getty Images, Magazine subscription

Stats:

views: | 10 |

posted: | 5/1/2011 |

language: | English |

pages: | 3 |

OTHER DOCS BY mikesanye

Docstoc is the premier online destination to start and grow small businesses. It hosts the best quality and widest selection of professional documents (over 20 million) and resources including expert videos, articles and productivity tools to make every small business better.

Search or Browse for any specific document or resource you need for your business. Or explore our curated resources for Starting a Business, Growing a Business or for Professional Development.

Feel free to Contact Us with any questions you might have.