Behaviour of pultruded beam-to-column joints using steel web cleats
Qureshi, J. and Mottram, J. Toby 2013. Behaviour of pultruded beam-to-column joints using steel web cleats. Thin-Walled Structures. 73 (Dec), pp. 48-56.
|Authors||Qureshi, J. and Mottram, J. Toby|
Response of pultruded Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) beam-to-column joints with steel bolted web cleats is studied through physical testing. Two joint configurations are considered with either three or two bolts per cleat leg, as per drawings in a pultruder's Design Manual. Moment–rotation curves, failure modes and potential performance gains from semi-rigid action are determined from two batches, each having six nominally identical joints. Results show that initial joint properties for stiffness and moment can possess, at 19 to 62%, an extremely high coefficient of variation. All joints failed by fracturing within the FRP column's flange outstands. Because this failure mode has not been reported previously there is a need to establish how its existence influences joint design. As joint properties for the three- and two-bolted configurations are not significantly different, the middle (third) bolt is found to be redundant. Damage is shown to initiate within the column flange outstands when the mid-span deflection of a 5.08 m span beam, subjected to a uniformly distributed load, is span/500. This is half the serviceability vertical deflection limit recommended in the EUROCOMP Design Code and Handbook. The mean joint moment resistance for design is established to be 2.9 kNm and this is 1.5 times the moment for damage onset.
|Keywords||bolted connections; steel-web cleats|
|Journal citation||73 (Dec), pp. 48-56|
|Accepted author manuscript|
|Web address (URL)||http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2013.06.019|
|Publication process dates|
|Deposited||16 Sep 2013|
|Copyright information||NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in <Journal title>. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Thin-Walled Structures, 73(Dec), 48-56, doi:10.1016/j.tws.2013.06.019|
0views this month
0downloads this month