Experimental Study on Performance of Ductile and Non-ductile Reinforced Concrete Exterior Beam-column Joint

Document Type : Original Article


Civil Engineering Department, Puducherry Technological University, Puducherry, India


The purpose of this study is to evaluate the behaviour and the performance of reinforced concrete (RC) exterior Beam-Column Joints (BCJ) experimentally under reverse quasi-static cycle displacement test conducted for ductile and non-ductile detailed reinforcement. Two columns (one upper and one lower) and one beam were used to construct the specimen; the beam end is free, while the other ends are fixed. These specimens were subjected to reverse cyclic quasi-static stress till failure. At each cycle, the hysteresis curve, cracking loads, ultimate loads, deflection of the loaded at the free end of the beam, crack patterns, and failure mechanisms of BCJ were recorded and studied. Additionally, all specimens’ energy dissipation and stiffness deterioration were addressed. The experimental results reveal that the ductile joint (DJ) performance is more satisfactory in all the parameters than the non-ductile joint (NDJ). The ultimate load and energy dissipation of DJ is approximately 20% higher than the NDJ. However, expected beam failure occurred in the ductile joint, and the non-ductile joint underwent undesirable joint failure.


Main Subjects

  1. M. M. Kassem, F. M. Nazri, E. N. Farsangi, and B. Ozturk, “Improved Vulnerability Index Methodology to Quantify Seismic Risk and Loss Assessment in Reinforced Concrete Buildings,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering., 2021.
  2. M. M. Kassem, F. Mohamed Nazri, E. N. Farsangi, and B. Ozturk, “Development of a uniform seismic vulnerability index framework for reinforced concrete building typology,” Jounral of. Build. Engineering., vol. 47, 2022.
  3. S. Ravikumar, S. Kothandaraman, Influencing Parameters of Exterior Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joint Shear Strength: A Depth Review of Recent Advances, International Journal of Engineering, Transactions B: Applications, Vol. 35, No. 05, (2022) 931-942. doi: 10.5829/ije.2022.35.05b.09.
  4. N. Hanson and H. Conner, “Seismic Resistance of Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints,” Jounral of Structural. Divison., vol. 93, no. 5, pp. 533–560, 1967.
  5. R. Park and T. Paulay, “Behaviour of reinforced concrete external beam-column joints under cyclic loading,” in Proceedings Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 1973, p. 10.
  6. R. Park and T. Paulay, Design Concrete Structures. John Wiley & Sons, New York., 1975.
  7. J. Kim and J. LaFave, “Probabilistic joint shear strength models for design of RC beam-column connections,” ACI Structural jounral, vol. 105, no. 6, pp. 770–780, 2008.
  8. J. Yu and K. H. Tan, “Special detailing techniques to improve structural resistance against progressive collapse,” Journal of Structural Engineering (United States), vol. 140, no. 3, pp. 1–15, 2014.
  9. S. Chidambaram and G. Thirugnanam, “Comparative Study on Behaviour of Reinforced Beam-Column Joints with Reference to Anchorage Detailing,” Journal of Civil Engineering  Research, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 12–17, 2012.
  10. Ravikumar and S. Kothandaraman, “Design of Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joint,” Interantional. Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology., vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 85–94, 2022. doi:10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V70I3P210
  11. Kusuhara and H. Shiohara, “Tests of RC Beam-Column Joint with Variant Boundary Conditions and Irregular Details on Anchorage of Beam Bars,” 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, pp. 1–8, 2008.
  12. M. Megget and N. J. Brooke, “Beam-column joint tests with grade 500E reinforcing,” no. NZSEE conference 41, 2004.
  13. IS: 8112 – 1989, “Specification for 43 grade Ordinary Portland Cement,” Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS),  Delhi, p. 17, 2013.
  14. IS 1786, “High Strength Deformed Steel Bars and Wires for Concretereinforcement— Specification,” Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS), New Delhi, pp. 1–12, 2008.
  15. IS 432, “Indian standard specification for mild steel and medium tensile steel bars and hard-drawn steel wire for concrete reinforcement,” Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS), 9, 1982.
  16. V. . Murty and V. V. M. Murty, C. V. R., Rupen, Goswami., A. R. Vijayanarayanan., Some Concepts Earthquake Behaviour of Buildings. GSDMA, 2012.
  17. IS:13920-2016, “Ductile Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces — Code of Practice,” Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS),. New Delhi, no. July, pp. 1–121, 2016.
  18. IS 456-2000, “Plain and Reinforced Concrete,” Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS). Dehli, pp. 1–114, 2000.
  19. IS:13920, Ductile Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces, no. July. Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS), 1993.
  20. Park, “Ductility evaluation from laboratory and analytical testing,” Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2-9 August. pp. 605–616, 1988.
  21. Ganesan, P. V. Indira, and R. Abraham, “Steel fibre reinforced high performance concrete beam-column joints subjected to cyclic loading,” ISET J. Earthq. Technol., vol. 44, no. 3–4, pp. 445–456, 2007.
  22. Marthong, A. Dutta, and S. K. Deb, “Effect of Cyclic Loading Frequency on the Behavior of External RC Beam-Column Connections,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering., vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 1126–1147, 2016.
  23. Lemaitre and R. Desmorat, Engineering Damage Mechanics: Ductile, Creep, Fatigue and Brittle Failures. Springer Science & Business Media, 2006.
  24. T. Nemati Aghamaleki, M. Naghipour, J. Vaseghi Amiri, M. Nematzadeh, Experimental Study on Compressive Behavior of Concrete-filled Double-skin Circular Tubes with Active Confinement, International Journal of Engineering, Transactions A: Basics Vol. 35, No. 04, (2022) 819-829
  25. K. and H. F. Sefatullah Halim, Susumu Takahashi, Toshikatsu Ichinose, Masaomi Teshigawara, “179-192 Amorn Pimanmas,” Preeda Chaimahawa Journal of Advance Concrete Technology, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 146–157, 2014.