• Home
  • Facility
    • ATLSS Facility
    • Personnel
    • IT Security
  • NEES
  • Safety
    • Notice
  • Projects
  • Resources
    • User’s Guide
    • Science Plan
    • Cybersecurity
    • Supported Software
    • Lehigh Data Model
    • RDV
    • Publications
      • 2014
      • 2013
      • 2012
      • 2011
      • 2010
      • 2009
      • 2008
      • 2007
      • 2006
      • 2005
      • 2004
      • 2003
      • 2002
    • Workshops
      • October 2011
      • November 2015
      • December 2016
  • Multimedia
    • Photos
      • William Allen High School Trip
      • Elastomeric Damper Installation
      • Victaulic Seismic Testing Photos
      • DBF Assembly
      • MISST Construction
      • SC-CBF Base Detail Study
      • BRBF Construction
      • BRBF Testing
      • BRBF Results
      • Composite MRF System with CFT Column Setup
      • Composite MRF System with CFT Column Results
    • Videos
      • Buckling-Restrained Braced Frame Videos
      • MRF System with CFT Columns Videos
      • MISST Videos
      • Victaulic Seismic Testing Videos
      • Diaphragm Seismic Design Methodology Videos
      • SC-MRF Videos
      • SC-CBF Videos
      • Impact Forces from Tsunami-driven Debris Videos
      • Advanced Damping Systems Videos
      • In The News Media
  • EOT
    • REU Program
  • News
  • Contact
  • Links
You are here: Home / Projects / MRF System with CFT Columns

Seismic Performance Evaluation of a Large-Scale Composite MRF System with CFT Columns


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Project Overview

The seismic performance of a composite moment resisting frame (MRF) comprised of concrete filled tube (CFT) columns and wide flange beams was investigated experimentally. The four-story composite MRF test structure was designed using performance-based design concepts. The performance objectives include achieving: (1) the operational performance level under the frequent occurrence earthquake; (2) the life safety performance level under the design basis earthquake; and (3) the collapse prevention performance level under the maximum considered earthquake. The hybrid pseudodynamic test method was used to subject the test structure to these various seismic input levels. P-Δ effects associated with the gravity frames in the prototype building were included analytically in the tests. Results from the tests indicated that the structural performance under the simulated seismic loading was consistent with the expected performance for all three earthquake levels, indicating that effective seismic performance of composite MRFs with CFT columns can be achieved.

Test Matrix

Test Record Earthquake Recording Station Accelerogram Scale Factor Earthquake Hazard Level Test Method
FOE 1979 Imperial Valley Array 06 0.400 FOE PSD
DBE 1994 Northridge Canoga Park 1.275 DBE PSD
MCE 1994 Northridge Canoga Park 1.912 MCE PSD
DBE-A 1994 Northridge Canoga Park 1.275 DBE PSD

Summary

To investigate the seismic behavior of CFT-MRF systems, a 0.6 scale CFT-MRF test structure was developed from a prototype building designed using performance based design criteria, and was tested in the laboratory. The pseudodynamic hybrid test method was used to subject the test structure to several ground motions representative of three earthquake input levels, namely, the FOE, DBE, and MCE. The performance objectives for the structure included a fully operational  condition under the FOE, and the life safety performance level and the collapse prevention performance level under the DBE and MCE, respectively. The IBC 2000 provisions were used to establish the required strength and stiffness of the structure. A weak beam-strong column configuration in the design was achieved using the AISC-LRFD criteria for the beam capacity and the ACI criteria for the CFT column capacity. Split tee beam-to-column moment connections were used to enable plastic hinges to form in the beams.

The test structure developed minor yielding during the FOE test. During the DBE test, the structure responded as a weak beam-strong column system, with extensive beam yielding and incipient beam local flange and web distortion at a few plastic hinge regions. The design drift limit of 2.5% was exceeded under the DBE, however, no strength degradation occurred. During the MCE test, extensive beam local buckling and yielding occurred in the beams, as well as yielding and concrete crushing at the base of the first story columns. In addition, the steel tube at the base of the first story center column fractured at the net section of the tube at the beam-to-column connection. This damage to the test structure during the MCE did not cause collapse, and stable, ductile behavior was observed. The test structure sustained a subsequent DBE level aftershock, thereby exceeding the requirements of the collapse prevention performance level.

The test structure response was consistent with the expected performance for all seismic input levels, indicating that effective seismic performance of composite MRFs with CFT columns can be achieved. The system overstrength during the DBE and MCE tests was 3.11 and 3.54, respectively, and was greater than the value of 3.0 for special MRFs in current seismic design provisions. Consequently, an overstrength factor value larger than 3.0 should be considered in design. The net section fracture at the ground floor level of a CFT column with a split tee beam-to-column connection can be avoided by reinforcing the net section such that the plastic hinge forms in the gross section of the column above the net section.

The experimental data from the test structure has enabled the verification of analytical models for CFT-MRF members and systems. Analytical models developed by the writers were shown to accurately predict the test structure response (Herrera 2005).  These models were also utilized to analyze the prototype structure under numerous ground motions scaled to the DBE and MCE. Performance similar to that observed in the test structure was observed at these two earthquake input levels.

Link to Timelapsed Video Results

Photos: Setup

Interior Schematic
Performance Objectives
Overview of the Frame
Prototype Elevation
Prototype Structure
Test Structure
[Show picture list]

Photos: Results

Plastic rotation distribution, DBE
Plastic rotation distribution, MCE
Envelope of global response, Story Drift Ratio (rad)
Envelope of global response, Story Shear (kN)
Local test structure response, DBE
Local test structure response, MCE test
Exterior connections after DBE test, South end, 1st floor
Exterior connections after DBE test, South end, 3rd floor
Crack on base of middle column after DBE-A
Exterior connections after MCE test, North end, 2nd floor
Exterior connections after MCE test, North end, 3rd floor
Crack on bottom flange of exterior connection after DBE-A
[Show picture list]

Related Publications

  • Herrera, R. (2005). “Seismic behavior of concrete filled tube column-wide flange beam frames.” Ph.D. thesis, Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, Pa.
  • Ricles, J. M., Peng, S. W., and Lu, L.-W. (2004). “Seismic behavior of composite concrete filled steel tube column-wide flange beam moment connections.” J. Struct. Eng., 130 (2), 223–232.
  • Peng, S. W., Ricles, J. M., and Lu, L. W. (2001). “Seismic resistant connections for concrete filled column-to-WF beam MRFs.” Rep. No. 01-08, ATLSS Engineering Research Center, Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, Pa.
  • Varma, A., Ricles, J. M., Sause, R., and Lu, L. W. (2002). “Seismic behavior and modeling of high-strength composite concrete-filled steel tube (CFT) beam–columns.” J. Constr. Steel Res., 58, 725–758.

Participants

Graduate Research Assistant

  • Ricardo Herrera

Faculty Advisors

  • James Ricles
  • Richard Sause

Sponsors

  • National Science Foundation (NSF)
  • Pennsylvania Infrastructure Technology Alliance(PITA), Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development
  • Pennsylvania D.C.E.D., Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development
  • Steel Tube Institute of North America

  • Categories

    • News and Events
    • Project Spotlight
  • Recent News

    • Building cladding as multi-hazard protection
    • NHERI Lehigh Seminar Series
    • Test to see how special wood structures fare in quakes
  • Archives

    • ► 2018 (1)
      • ► March (1)
        • Building cladding as multi-hazard protection
    • ► 2017 (2)
      • ► October (1)
        • NHERI Lehigh Seminar Series
      • ► July (1)
        • Test to see how special wood structures fare in quakes
    • ► 2015 (1)
      • ► September (1)
        • Lehigh wins $5M for natural hazards engineering research
    • ► 2014 (5)
      • ► November (1)
        • Everest grad and Lehigh REU student builds robot to study earthquakes
      • ► September (1)
        • Testing of NEESR-CR: Post-Tensioned Coupled Shear Wall Systems at Lehigh University Friday, November 10, 2014
      • ► May (2)
        • Full-scale, components test of Inertial Force-Limiting Floor Anchorage Systems for Seismic Resistant Building Structures
        • Souderton Area H.S. students from the civil/structural engineering class recently visited ATLSS and Fritz Lab.
      • ► April (1)
        • Engineers re-create tsunami debris impacts to measure their force
    • ► 2013 (10)
      • ► November (1)
        • Testing of NEESR-CR: Post-Tensioned Coupled Shear Wall Systems at Lehigh University Friday, November 08, 2013
      • ► October (3)
        • NEESreu Program Highlights at Lehigh University, Summer 2013
        • Full-scale testing of partially-grouted, reinforced concrete masonry wall structure
        • Job Opening at ATLSS
      • ► September (1)
        • Real-time Hybrid Simulations of a Large-scale Steel Structure with Elastomeric Dampers
      • ► July (1)
        • Real-time Hybrid Simulations of a Large-scale Steel Structure with Nonlinear Viscous Dampers Subjected to the Maximum Considered Earthquake Hazard Level
      • ► June (1)
        • 2013 REU Schedule Posted
      • ► May (1)
        • TechGYRLS Tour ATLSS lab
      • ► April (1)
        • Real-time Hybrid Simulations of a Large-scale Steel Structure with Nonlinear Viscous Dampers
      • ► February (1)
        • RTHS being performed this week
    • ► 2012 (3)
      • ► December (1)
        • Simulating Earthquakes by Combining Analytical Models with Physical Structures
      • ► June (1)
        • Hybrid Simulation Data Model now supported with NEEShub Release 4.0
      • ► March (1)
        • Researchers probe how strong buildings must be to survive tsunamis
    • ► 2011 (9)
      • ► August (2)
        • Advances in Real Time Hybrid Simulation Workshop
        • Upcoming workshop
      • ► March (3)
        • Seismic Hazard Mitigation using Passive Damper Systems
        • Distributed RT Hybrid Testing
        • Pictures from William Allen HS Field Trip
      • ► February (2)
        • Student Field Trip this Friday
        • Testing on passive damping systems
      • ► January (2)
        • NEES equipment maintenance
        • "Megaquake 10.0" History Channel Special Features NEES Projects
    • ► 2010 (3)
      • ► December (1)
        • MR Damper Projects
      • ► September (1)
        • SteelDay 2010
      • ► June (1)
        • ATLSS Welcomes the 2010 NEES REU Students
    • ► 2009 (3)
      • ► July (1)
        • Three ATLSS Center researchers honored by American Society of Civil Engineers
      • ► May (1)
        • ATLSS welcomes the 2009 REU Students
      • ► February (1)
        • Lehigh Webinar for RTMD users
    • ► 2008 (12)
      • ► November (1)
        • NEESR-SG: Self-Centering Damage-Free Seismic-Resistant Steel Frame Systems SC-MRF Hybrid Simulation for High-Level MCE
      • ► October (4)
        • NEESR-SG: Self-Centering Damage-Free Seismic-Resistant Steel Frame Systems SC-MRF Hybrid Simulation for Aftershock
        • NEESR-SG: Self-Centering Damage-Free Seismic-Resistant Steel Frame Systems SC-MRF Median MCE Hybrid Simulation
        • NEESR-SG: Self-Centering Damage-Free Seismic-Resistant Steel Frame Systems SC-MRF High-Level DBE/Median MCE Hybrid Simulation
        • NEESR-SG: Self-Centering Damage-Free Seismic-Resistant Steel Frame Systems SC-MRF High-Level DBE Hybrid Simulation
      • ► September (1)
        • ATLSS involved in Discovery Channel program
      • ► August (1)
        • "The Works" highlights ATLSS
      • ► July (1)
        • RTMD hosts Launch-IT
      • ► May (3)
        • ATLSS Seminar: Overview of Structures for 2008 Olympic Games
        • 2008 NEES REU program begins
        • Germantown High students get all shook up on field trip
      • ► March (1)
        • 3D Model Panel for RDV Update
    • ► 2007 (6)
      • ► November (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for November, 2007
      • ► October (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for October, 2007
      • ► September (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for September, 2007
      • ► June (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for June, 2007
      • ► May (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for May, 2007
      • ► February (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for February, 2007
    • ► 2006 (8)
      • ► November (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for November, 2006
      • ► July (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for July, 2006
      • ► June (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for June, 2006
      • ► May (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for May, 2006
      • ► April (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for April, 2006
      • ► March (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for March, 2006
      • ► February (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for February, 2006
      • ► January (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for January, 2006
    • ► 2005 (5)
      • ► December (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for December, 2005
      • ► November (1)
        • RTMD Highlights for November, 2005
      • ► October (1)
        • Hybrid Testing Workshop in San Diego
      • ► August (1)
        • E-Defense Workshop
      • ► June (1)
        • Self Centering Workshop
    • ► 2004 (1)
      • ► October (1)
        • NEES@Lehigh begins

[site map] Copyright © 2017 · All Rights Reserved · Lehigh University · The Lehigh NHERI Experimental Facility is supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (#1520765). Disclaimer: Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.