• Journal of the Korea institute for structural maintenance and inspection
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.183-192
• /
• 2008

Generally, application of steel pipe pile as deep foundation member needs special requirement for the connection method between steel pipe pile and concrete footing. Even though two types of connection method are suggested in the korea highway bridge code, type-B method is prevalent. In this study, vertical, lateral, and tension loading test are done for two types of type B connection to review stress concentration, formation and behavior of imaginary RC column in the footing. Welding type and hook type as the connection method are considered in this study. Test results show that welding type have the more reserve capacity than hook type and the specimens connected by the welding type behave as the imaginary RC column in the footing. However, the specimens connected by the hook type did not behave as the imaginary RC column in the footing but behave as the hinge.

• Proceedings of the Computational Structural Engineering Institute Conference
• /
• 1999.04a
• /
• pp.210-217
• /
• 1999

This paper deals with the analysis for column shortening of RC frame structure considering the construction sequences. The time-dependent effects of concrete are taken into consideration in this study to simulate the actual structural behavior. The stiffness matrix of a beam element is derived on the bases of the layer approach, dividing a section with imaginary layers. Creep and shrinkage strains at each layer are calculated by using the first-order algorithm based on the expansion of creep compliance. Finally, the correlation studies with the purpose of analyzing the time-dependent behavior of building structure are conducted using the analytical model proposed in this study.

• Journal of the Korea Concrete Institute
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.288-296
• /
• 2003

Generally, application of steel pipe pile as deep foundation member needs special requirement for the connection method between steel pipe pile and concrete footing. Even though two types of connection method are suggested in the related specification, type B-method is provident. To investigate real structural behavior of type B connection, several load tests are done with carefully designed experimental system. The purpose of this experiment is mainly focused on the understanding of actual behavior which can be predicted by design theory. At this research stage, vertical and lateral loading test are done for three types of specimen to review stress concentration, formation and behavior of imaginary RC column in the footing and effect of non-slip device installed in the steel pipe pile. The load resistance mechanism in these specific connection method is predicted based on both experimental results. The three-dimensional finite element modeling is also done for the purpose of comparison between numerical and experimental result. With all the results gained from experiment the structural behavior of imaginary RC column in the design concept is confirmed. The role of non-slip device is very important and it affects the resistance capacity with help of composite action of concrete and steel pipe pile.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2006.05a
• /
• pp.190-193
• /
• 2006

The definition of the Dual system is that the total seismic force resistance is to be provided by the combination of the moment frame and the shear walls or braced frames in proportion to their stiffness and the moment frame shall be capable of resisting at least 25% of the design force in Korean Building Code 2005 (KBC 2005). But, the definition of moment frame is ambiguous whether the moment frame include the imaginary columns in the shear wall (Case I) or include only the columns outside the shear wall (Case II). 60-story RC building was designed as dual system for Case I and Case II, and the required strength and reinforcement are compared. Moment and axial capacity of the shear wall of Case II decreased about 5% due to the absence of the column in the shear wall. The requirement of upper and bottom reinforcement of slab in Case II increased 13% and 40%, respectively, when compared to those of Case I. The required longitudinal reinforcement in columns for Case II is about 1.5 times larger than that of Case I.