FE Modeling and Seismic Performance Evaluation of Hybrid SMA-Steel RC Beam-Column Joints

Rezvanisharif, Mostafa; Ketabi, Mohammad Sadegh

doi:10.1590/1679-78255272

Mostafa Rezvanisharif ^**Corresponding author

Civil Engineering Faculty, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: Rezvanisharif@kntu.ac.ir, E-mail: msketabi@mail.kntu.ac.ir

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3588-7417

Mohammad Sadegh Ketabi

Civil Engineering Faculty, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: Rezvanisharif@kntu.ac.ir, E-mail: msketabi@mail.kntu.ac.ir

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9110-3229

*Corresponding author

Author Contributions:

Investigation, MS Ketabi; Writing-Original Draft, MS Ketabi; Writing-Review & Editing, M Rezvanisharif and MS Ketabi; Supervision, M Rezvanisharif.

Editor:

Marco L. Bittencourt.

Figures (24)
Tables (4)

Thumbnail

Figure 1:
The effects of the element (mesh) size and type on the load-displacement response of JBC2

Thumbnail

Figure 2:
Hysteretic behavior models: (a) concrete in tension and compression, (b) steel reinforcement, and (c) SESMA rebar (Wong et al., 2013Wong, P. S., Vecchio, F. J., and Trommels, H. (2013). Vector2 & Formworks user’s manual second edition, University of Toronto, Canada.)

Thumbnail

Figure 3:
The user-defined bond stress-slip envelope curve for sand-coated SESMA rebars

Thumbnail

Figure 4:
The method used for modifying SESMA model of VecTor2

Thumbnail

Figure 5:
Experimental and numerical stress-strain curves of Ni55-Ti45: (a) experimental (Youssef et al. 2008Youssef, M. A., Alam, M. S., and Nehdi, M. (2008). Experimental investigation on the seismic behavior of beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12(7): 1205-1222.), (b) numerical modeling by using the “SMA2” material model of Vec2, (c) numerical modeling by using the “Modified SMA2” material model, and (d) the comparison of cases b and c.

Thumbnail

Figure 6:
Comparison between experimental (see ) and numerical stress-strain curves of three different types of SESMAs, (a) FeNCATB SESMA, (b) Ni56-Ti44 SESMA, (c) FeMnAlNi SESMA

Thumbnail

Figure 7:
Typical FE model of JBC2 in VecTor2(a), details of specimens JBC1(b) and JBC2(c) (Youssef et al. 2008Youssef, M. A., Alam, M. S., and Nehdi, M. (2008). Experimental investigation on the seismic behavior of beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12(7): 1205-1222.), and cyclic loading protocol(d)

Thumbnail

Figure 8:
Comparison between the numerical predictions and experimental results (Youssef et al. 2008Youssef, M. A., Alam, M. S., and Nehdi, M. (2008). Experimental investigation on the seismic behavior of beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12(7): 1205-1222.) of JBC1. (a) beam tip load-displacement, (b) energy dissipation, (c) beam moment-rotation, (d) cracking pattern

Thumbnail

Figure 9:
Comparison between the numerical predictions and experimental results (Youssef et al. 2008Youssef, M. A., Alam, M. S., and Nehdi, M. (2008). Experimental investigation on the seismic behavior of beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12(7): 1205-1222.) of JBC2. (a) beam tip load-displacement, (b) energy dissipation, (c) beam moment-rotation, (d) cracking pattern

Thumbnail

Figure 10:
Details of test samples: DSB-P-1.0 (a), DSB-S-1.0(b), SSB-S-1.0(c), and SSB-P-1.0 (d) (Oudah 2015Oudah, F. (2015). Development of innovative self-centering concrete beam-column connections reinforced using shape memory alloys, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Calgary, Canada.) and typical finite element modeling of DSB-P-1.0 and SSB-P-1.0

Thumbnail

Figure 11:
Comparison between the numerical and experimental (Oudah 2015Oudah, F. (2015). Development of innovative self-centering concrete beam-column connections reinforced using shape memory alloys, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Calgary, Canada.) results of beam tip load-displacement relationship. (a) DSB_S_1.0, (b) DSB_P_1.0, (c) SSB_S_1.0 and (d) SSB_P_1.0.

Thumbnail

Figure 12:
Comparison between the numerical and experimental (Oudah 2015Oudah, F. (2015). Development of innovative self-centering concrete beam-column connections reinforced using shape memory alloys, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Calgary, Canada.) results of cumulative hysteresis energy dissipation. (a) DSB_S_1.0, (b) DSB_P_1.0, (c) SSB_S_1.0 and (d) SSB_P_1.0.

Thumbnail

Figure 13:
Schematic stress-strain relationship of SESMA

Thumbnail

Figure 14:
Effect of the Austenite yield strength (Fy) of SESMA rebars on seismic behavior of JBC2: (a) envelopes of the load-displacement curves, (b) hysteresis curves of load-displacement, (c) cumulative energy dissipation, (d) stress-strain curves of SESMA for different values of Fy.

Thumbnail

Figure 15:
Effect of the Austenite modulus (K1) of SESMA on seismic behavior of JBC2: (a) envelopes of the load-displacement curves, (b) hysteresis curves of load-displacement, (c) cumulative energy dissipation, (d) stress-strain curves of SESMA for different values of K1.

Thumbnail

Figure 16:
Effect of the post-yield stiffness (K2) of SESMA on seismic behavior of JBC2: (a) envelopes of the load-displacement curves, (b) hysteresis curves of load-displacement, (c) cumulative energy dissipation, (d) stress-strain curves of SESMA for different values of K2.

Thumbnail

Figure 17:
Effect of the lower plateau stress factor (K3) of SESMA on seismic behavior of JBC2: (a) envelopes of the load-displacement curves, (b) two half cycles of the hysteretic load-displacement curves, (c) cumulative energy dissipation, (d) stress-strain curves of SESMA for different values of K3.

Thumbnail

Figure 18:
Effect of the concrete strength on seismic behavior of JBC2: (a) envelopes of the load-displacement curves, (b) hysteresis curves of load-displacement, (c) cumulative energy dissipation.

Thumbnail

Figure 19:
Effect of the beam reinforcement ratio on seismic behavior of JBC2: (an envelope of the load-displacement curves, (b) hysteresis curves of load-displacement, (c) cumulative energy dissipation.

Thumbnail

Figure 20:
Comparison cyclic response of JBC2-Ni55Ti45 (Youssef et al. 2008Youssef, M. A., Alam, M. S., and Nehdi, M. (2008). Experimental investigation on the seismic behavior of beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12(7): 1205-1222.) with (a) JBC2-FeMnAlNi, (b) JBC2-FeNCATB and (C) JBC2-Ni56Ti44; and (d) Numerical stress-strain curves of the SESMAs.

Thumbnail

Figure 21:
Seismic response of JBC2 reinforced with four different types of SESMAs: (a) envelopes for the load-displacement relationships, (b) cumulative energy dissipation

Thumbnail

Figure 22:
Results of the numerical investigation on JBC2 reinforced with different amounts of FeNCATB-SMA and steel reinforcement.

Thumbnail

Figure 23:
Comparison of (a) cyclic response and (b) hysteresis energy dissipation of JBC2-Ni55Ti45 with JBC2-FeNCATB up to 125 mm displacement

Thumbnail

Figure 24:
Schematic view, cracking pattern, cyclic response, and energy dissipation of JBC2-FeNCATB with or without PHRT

Thumbnail

Table 1
Material behavior models utilized in the modeling of concrete

Thumbnail

Table 2:
Mechanical characteristic of four SESMA Samples used in the numerical investigation

Thumbnail

Table 3:
Comparison of predicted (Vec2) and measured (EXP) responses for positive loading direction

Thumbnail

Table 4:
Comparison of predicted (Vec2) and measured (EXP) responses for negative loading direction

Material Property	Model	Observation
Concrete Compression Pre-Peak and Post-Peak Responses	Hoshikuma et al. model (Hoshikuma et al. 1997Hoshikuma, J., Kawashima, K., Nagaya, K., and Taylor, A. W. (1997). Stress-strain model for confined reinforced concrete in bridge piers, Journal of Structural Engineering 123(5): 624-633.)	----
Concrete Compression Softening	Vecchio 1992-A (Wong et al. 2013Wong, P. S., Vecchio, F. J., and Trommels, H. (2013). Vector2 & Formworks user’s manual second edition, University of Toronto, Canada.)	e1/e2-Form (The strength-and-strained softened model)
Concrete Tension Stiffening	Lee model (Lee et al. 2011Lee, S.-C., Cho, J.-Y., and Vecchio, F. J. (2011). Model for post-yield tension stiffening and rebar rupture in concrete members, Engineering Structures 33(5): 1723-1733.)	With post-yield effects
Concrete Tension Softening	Bilinear (Comité Euro-International du Béton 1993)	----
Concrete Confined Strength	Kupfer/Richard Model (Wong et al. 2013Wong, P. S., Vecchio, F. J., and Trommels, H. (2013). Vector2 & Formworks user’s manual second edition, University of Toronto, Canada.)	----
Concrete Dilation	Variable Montoya (Montoya et al. 2006Montoya, E., Vecchio, F. J., and Sheikh, S. A. (2006). Compression field modeling of confined concrete: constitutive models, Journal of materials in civil engineering 18(4): 510-517.)	With a limitation on the Poisson’s Ratio
Concrete Cracking Criterion	Mohr-Coulomb	Stress-based formulation
Concrete Crack Stress Calc.	Advanced Lee model (Wong et al. 2013Wong, P. S., Vecchio, F. J., and Trommels, H. (2013). Vector2 & Formworks user’s manual second edition, University of Toronto, Canada.)	A modified version of the DSFM/MCFT method (employing different convergence criteria)
Concrete Crack Slip Check	Vecchio-Lai model (Vecchio and Lai 2004Vecchio, F. J., and Lai, D. (2004). Crack shear-slip in reinforced concrete elements, Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology 2(3): 289-300.)	With cyclic effects
Concrete Crack Width Check	Stability check omitted	----
Concrete Hysteretic Response	Palermo model (Palermo and Vecchio, 2003Palermo, D., and Vecchio, F. J. (2003). Compression field modeling of reinforced concrete subjected to reversed loading: formulation, ACI Structural Journal 100(5): 616-625.)	With decay effects

SESMA	FeMnAlNi	FeNCATB	Ni56-Ti44	Ni55-Ti45
$σ_{S}^{AM}$ (Mpa)¹	320	750	415	401
$σ_{f}^{AM}$ (Mpa)²	442.5	1200	540	510
$σ_{S}^{MA}$ (Mpa)³	210.8	300	170	370
$σ_{f}^{MA}$ (Mpa)⁴	122	200	120	130
E(GPa)⁵	98.4	46.9	60	62.5
$ε_{l}$ (%)⁶	6.13	13.5	8	6
$Reff$ .	Omori et al. (2011Omori, T., Ando, K., Okano, M., Xu, X., Tanaka, Y., Ohnuma, I., Kainuma, R., and Ishida, K. (2011). Superelastic effect in polycrystalline ferrous alloys, Science 33(6038): 68-71.)	Tanaka et al. (2010Tanaka, Y., Himuro, Y., Kainuma, R., Sutou, Y., Omori, T., and Ishida, K. (2010). Ferrous polycrystalline shape-memory alloy showing huge superelasticity, Science 327(5972): 1488-1490.)	Abdulridha et al. (2013Abdulridha, A., Palermo, D., Foo, S., and Vecchio, F. J. (2013). Behavior and modeling of superelastic shape memory alloy reinforced concrete beams, Engineering Structures 49: 893-904.)	Youssef et al. (2008Youssef, M. A., Alam, M. S., and Nehdi, M. (2008). Experimental investigation on the seismic behavior of beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12(7): 1205-1222.)

Specimen (Type of Reinforcement)	Result	Yielding Strength		Maximum Strength		Ultimate strength		Energy (kN.m)	$\frac{E_{V e c 2}}{E_{E X P}}$	$\frac{μ_{V c e 2}}{μ_{E X P}}$
Specimen (Type of Reinforcement)	Result	Py (kN)	δy (mm)	Pmax (kN)	δmax (mm)	Pu (kN)	δu (mm)
JBC1 (Steel)	EXP	-	-	66.5	72	66.5	72	26.7	1.12	-
JBC1 (Steel)	Vec2	55.6	12	66.2	72	66.2	72	29.8
JBC2 (SMA and Steel)	EXP	32.7	18	68.1	72	68.1	72	16.3	0.9	1.02
JBC2 (SMA and Steel)	Vec2	47	18.3	71	72	71	72	14.9
SSB-S-1.0 (Steel)	EXP	40	11	67	55	67	55	59	1.13	0.91
SSB-S-1.0 (Steel)	Vec2	44	10	66.7	55	66.7	55	67
DSB-S-1.0 (Steel)	EXP	41	14	68	85	68	85	171.7	0.97	0.86
DSB-S-1.0 (Steel)	Vec2	38.2	12	64.4	70	58.5	85	166
SSB-P-1.0 (SMA and Steel)	EXP	44	32	44	75	44	75	26	0.81	1.09
SSB-P-1.0 (SMA and Steel)	Vec2	43	35	45.8	75	45.8	75	21
DSB-P-1.0 (SMA and Steel)	EXP	44	39	56	120	56	120	51.2	0.79	1
DSB-P-1.0 (SMA and Steel)	Vec2	44.5	39	56.2	120	56.2	120	40.4

Specimen (Type of Reinforcement)	Result	Yielding Strength		Maximum Strength		Ultimate strength		Energy (kN.m)	$\frac{E_{V e c 2}}{E_{E X P}}$	$\frac{μ_{V c e 2}}{μ_{E X P}}$
Specimen (Type of Reinforcement)	Result	Py (kN)	δy (mm)	Pmax (kN)	δmax (mm)	Pu (kN)	δu (mm)
JBC1 (Steel)	EXP	51.3	12	61.5	72	61.5	72	26.7	1.12	1.067
JBC1 (Steel)	Vec2	56.2	12.8	61.2	72	61.2	72	29.8
JBC2 (SMA and Steel)	EXP	-	-	64	72	64	72	16.3	0.9	-
JBC2 (SMA and Steel)	Vec2	42.7	18	66.2	72	66.2	72	14.9
SSB-S-1.0 (Steel)	EXP	34	11	71	55	71	55	59	1.13	0.91
SSB-S-1.0 (Steel)	Vec2	44.4	10	68.4	55	68.4	55	67
DSB-S-1.0 (Steel)	EXP	36	14	57	85	57	85	171.7	0.97	1.07
DSB-S-1.0 (Steel)	Vec2	38	15	56.4	75	53.4	85	166
SSB-P-1.0 (SMA and Steel)	EXP	47	32	68	75	68	75	26	0.81	0.94
SSB-P-1.0 (SMA and Steel)	Vec2	45	30	65.1	67	64.2	75	21
DSB-P-1.0 (SMA and Steel)	EXP	30	39	39	120	39	120	51.2	0.79	1
DSB-P-1.0 (SMA and Steel)	Vec2	38	39	49	120	49	120	40.4

[1] *Corresponding author

Brasil

Brasil

FE Modeling and Seismic Performance Evaluation of Hybrid SMA-Steel RC Beam-Column Joints

Abstract