Behavior of geopolymer and conventional concrete beam column joints under reverse cyclic loading

Raj, Shubham; Ganesan, N.; Abraham, Ruby; Raju, Anumol

doi:10.12989/acc.2016.4.3.161

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There have been a few published studies investigating GPC monolithic joints [31][32][33][34] while there has been no research examining the performances of ambient-cured GPC precast joints under cyclic loading in the open literature. The majority of previous studies related to GPC joints were based on testing on small size samples.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of geopolymer concrete in monolithic and non-corrosive dry joints using CFRP bolts under cyclic loading

Ngo

Tran

Pham

2021

Composite Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of geopolymer concrete in monolithic and non-corrosive dry joints using CFRP bolts under cyclic loading

Ngo

Tran

Pham

2021

Composite Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The procedure adopted for calculating the moment-curvature relationship was previously explained by the authors elsewhere [ 65 ]. The moment-curvature behaviour of a material is crucial for evaluating its ductility property.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been observed that the curvature regularly increases as the moment increases until the formation of several micro cracks. The plots exhibit a slightly flat trend as the cracks developed further while the specimen reached the peak moment [ 65 ]. In the HTGPC specimens, as the steel fibre content increased from 0.5% to 1%, the curvature increased significantly.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behaviour of Hybrid Fibre-Reinforced Ternary Blend Geopolymer Concrete Beam-Column Joints under Reverse Cyclic Loading

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beam–column joints are extremely vulnerable to lateral and vertical loads in reinforced concrete (RC) structures. This insufficiency in joint performance can lead to the failure of the whole structure in the event of unforeseen seismic and wind loads. This experimental work was conducted to study the behaviour of ternary blend geopolymer concrete (TGPC) beam-column joints with the addition of hybrid fibres, viz., steel and polypropylene fibres, under reverse cyclic loads. Nine RC beam-column joints were prepared and tested under reverse cyclic loading to recreate the conditions during an earthquake. M55 grade TGPC was designed and used in this present study. The primary parameters studied in this experimental investigation were the volume fractions of steel fibres (0.5% and 1.0%) and polypropylene fibres, viz., 0.1 to 0.25%, with an increment of 0.05%. In this study, the properties of hybrid fibre-reinforced ternary blend geopolymer concrete (HTGPC) beam-column joints, such as their ductility, energy absorption capacity, initial crack load and peak load carrying capacity, were investigated. The test results imply that the hybridisation of fibres effectively enhances the joint performance of TGPC. Also, an effort was made to compare the shear strength of HTGPC beam-column connections with existing equations from the literature. As the available models did not match the actual test results, a method was performed to obtain the shear strength of HTGPC beam-column connections. The developed equation was found to compare convincingly with the experimental test results.

show abstract

“…Saranya et al 25 reported that the ductility of ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS)-dolomite-based GC beam-column joints was better than that of RC beam-column joints. Raj et al 26 found that the seismic performance of fly ash-based GC beamcolumn joints was slightly better than that of RC beam-column joints. According to Datta and Premkumar, 27 the seismic performance of GGBS-fly ash-based GC beam-column joints was similar to that of RC beam-column joints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…reported that the ductility of ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS)‐dolomite‐based GC beam‐column joints was better than that of RC beam‐column joints. Raj et al 26 . found that the seismic performance of fly ash‐based GC beam‐column joints was slightly better than that of RC beam‐column joints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic performance of interior beam‐column joints using reinforced slag‐based geopolymer concrete

Mao

Hwang

et al. 2022

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although geopolymer concrete (GC) is recognized as a green and low‐carbon material, GC structural members, particularly beam‐column joints, have been rarely studied. In the present study, eight reinforced GC joints and three reinforced concrete (RC) interior beam‐column joints were tested under cyclic loading. The test parameters were the concrete type, joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio, and axial‐compression ratio. The structural performance, including the failure mode, crack development, cyclic behavior of reinforced GC beam‐column joints, was evaluated. The test results showed that the cyclic behavior and crack development of the reinforced GC beam‐column joints differed from those of RC beam‐column joints. The increase of axial compression ratio improved the seismic performance of reinforced GC beam‐column joints with the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio of 0.96–1.01. When the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio was 1.54–1.61, the increase of axial compression ratio (0.1–0.3) improved the seismic performance, while the axial compression ratio of 0.5 was unfavorable because of significant joint shear damage. The applicability of the control conditions in the current design codes to the reinforced GC joints was evaluated. The control conditions of ACI 318–19 were applicable to the seismic design of reinforced GC beam‐column joints. On the other hand, the control conditions of GB50010‐2010 were not applicable because of the overestimated upper limit value of the joint shear demand‐to‐capacity ratio and axial compression ratio.

show abstract

Behavior of geopolymer and conventional concrete beam column joints under reverse cyclic loading

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Performance of geopolymer concrete in monolithic and non-corrosive dry joints using CFRP bolts under cyclic loading

Performance of geopolymer concrete in monolithic and non-corrosive dry joints using CFRP bolts under cyclic loading

Behaviour of Hybrid Fibre-Reinforced Ternary Blend Geopolymer Concrete Beam-Column Joints under Reverse Cyclic Loading

Seismic performance of interior beam‐column joints using reinforced slag‐based geopolymer concrete

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About