Table of Experimental Studies on CFT Connection Tests

General Information

Reference	Experiment Synopsis	Number of Tests	Loading Method	Results Reported	Main Parameters	Comments
Dunberry, LeBlanc, and Redwood 1987	Axial loading of square stub columns through shear connections	18 CFTs	Axial load applied at the top and at the connection simultaneously	P vs. εs, εconcr L vs. ds (slip) L vs. Pc, Ps θc vs. P	Connection detail Connection load/total axial load D/t End conditions (capped, uncapped)
Kamba, Kanatani, and Tabuchi 1991	Shear tests of through diaphragm connections to square CFT and HT columns	5 CFTs 5 HTs	Shear couples acting on the diaphragm plates	σ-ε relations for steel Vu, Vy, Ko Vcu, Vcy, Kco V vs. γ τc vs. γ	D/t (column and panel zone) CFT vs. HT Annealing of steel tube
Prion and McLellan 1992	Through-bolt connections between steel wide-flange girders and CFTs	8 CFTs	Tension pull-out and compression pull-in tests	Concrete and steel stress-strain relationships Bolt slip-load and load-strain relationships	Post-tensioning of the bolts in the connection
Azizinamini and Prakash 1992	Pass-through girder with internal stiffeners	1 CFT	Shear forces were applied to the girder ends in opposite directions	N.A.	N.A.
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	Full-scale simple interior beam-to-column connections of circular and square CFTs	28 CFTs	Symm. loading of the beams and axial loading of the column, simult. Beam-to-column load ratios were 1:8 or 1:5	M vs. θc Ko, Pu P vs. εs	Fin-plate vs. tee cleat D t Shear connector Beam load to column load ratio Eccentricity of beam load
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	Monotonic tests for full-scale simple exterior beam-to-column connections of square CFTs	4 CFTs	Eccentric loading of the beam and axial loading of the column, simult. Beam-to-column load ratios were 1:8 or 1:5	M vs. θc Ko, Pu Longitudinal strain distribution along the column length	Beam load to column ratio Eccentricity of beam load
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	Monotonic test for full-scale simple interior beam-to-column connections of square CFTs	4 CFTs	Symm. loading of the beams and axial loading of the column, simult. Beam-to-column ratios were 1:3, 1:5 or 1:8	M vs. θc Ko, Pu P vs. in-plane displacement along the column length	Beam load-to-column load ratio Eccentricity of beam load
Kawano and Matsui 1997 Kawano and Matsui 1997 II	Simple tension tests on CFT and HT connections and cyclic tests on cruciform frames including both CFTs and HTs	6 CFTs, 9 HTs (simple tension) 9 CFTs, 11 HTs (cruciform frame)	Tensile loading until fracture through flanges (smpl. tension test) Constant axial load on the columns and cyclic shear force at the girder ends (cruciform frames)	Pu, Pa, Pu/Pa Vu/Vc V vs. R	CFT vs. HT Connection type Size of diaphragm and vertical stiffener
Schneider and Alostaz 1998	Cyclic testing of 2/3 scale beam-to-column connections of circular CFTs	6 CFTs	Constant axial load on to the column and cyclic shear load at the girder end	M vs. θ, Mc	Connection details
France, Davison, and Kirby 1999	Cyclic and monotonic loading of beam-to-column flow-drill connections of square CFTs and HTs	20 HTs 6 CFTs	Monotonic or cyclic shear force applied at the girder tips with either constant or no axial load acting on the columns	M vs. θ, Mu, θu	CFT vs. HT Connection type (simple or fully restrained) Beam size t P Bolt spacing Endplate type fy
Cheng, Hwang, and Chung 2000	Cyclic loading of beam-to-column connections of circular CFTs	3 CFTs 3 HTs	Constant axial load on the columns and cyclic shear load at the girder ends	V vs. girder-end deflection Contribution of girder, column, and panel zone to the total deformation	CFT vs. HT D/t Connection type
Elremaily and Azizinamini 2001	Loading of through beam connection specimens representing interior joints	7 CFTs	Constant axial load on the columns and equal and opposite vertical loads on the beam ends	Load vs. Drift Load vs. Shear Strain Load vs. Joint Distortion	Beam-to-column flexural capacity ratio Type of weld Connection type
Kingsley et al. 2005	Performance and constructability of embedded-type CFT column-concrete footing connection with slender tubes of high-performance vanadium-alloy steel	3 CFTs	Constant axial load on the columns and cyclic lateral load at the top of the column	Drift Ratio vs. Horizontal Load Drift Ratio vs. Column Base Moment	Embedment Depth Vertical Reinforcement in Footing f'c Flange Dimensions
Cheng, Chan, and Chung 2007	Seismic performance of four steel beam to CFT column connection with floor slabs	4 CFTs	Constant axial load on the columns and cyclic shear load at each beam tip	Load vs. Displacement Load vs. Rotation	Connection Type
Nie, Bai, and Cai 2008	Cyclic loading connections between CFT columns and reinforced concrete beam	3 cyclic interior column connection tests 3 cyclic corner column connection tests	Constant axial load on the columns and cyclic shear load at the girder ends	Load displacement plots for all 6 specimens	Confinement in the connection region
Lee, Kim, and Song 2008	CFT column to reinforced concrete flat plate connections subjected to gravity loading	8 CFT Columns to reinforced concrete flat plate connections	Monotonic downward vertical loading	Failure Mode Vertical Load vs. Downward Displacement	Connection Type Anchorage Type Shear Key Type Post-Punching Bars
Nie, Qin, and Cai 2008	CFT column to reinforced concrete flat plate connections subjected to gravity loading	Seismic behavior of connections composed of concrete-filled square steel tubular columns and steel-concrete composite beams 14 Cruciform Connection Specimens	Axial load on top of column and cyclic loading at ends	Strength Deformation Energy Dissipation P vs. &delta	Interior Diaphragms Exterior Diaphragms Anchor Studs
Lehman and Roeder 2012	Seismic performance of four steel beam to CFT column connection with floor slabs	19 CFTs	Constant axial load on the columns and cyclic lateral load at the top of the column	Drift Ratio vs. Cycle Load vs. Displacement Load vs. Rotation	Connection Type Load Embedment Depth Load History Fy

Specimen Information

Reference	Beam Information	Connection Information (Plate and Stiffener)	End Conditions
Dunberry, LeBlanc, and Redwood 1987	N.A	Standard tee: 14.2 x (0.31 or 0.47) gusset plate Extended tee: 22.83 x 0.31 gusset plate Shortened tee: 8.66 x 0.31 gusset plate Single plate had only web without gusset plate	N.A.
Kamba, Kanatani, and Tabuchi 1991	N.A	Through diaphragm plates manufactured from PL25	Pinned-pinned (column)
Prion and McLellan 1992	N.A	N.A.	N.A.
Azizinamini and Prakash 1992	W30 x 99	Four #11 reinforcing bars with 4 x 2 x 1 in. plates welded to the ends were attached to the girder inside the CFT	N.A.
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	406 x 178 x 67 UB	10.24 or 14.17 in. long and 3.94 x 0.39 in. fin-plates 14.17 in. long tee cleats manufactured from 305 x 127 x 48 UB type beam 0.146 in. diameter 2.44 in. long Hilti nails	Pinned-pinned (column)
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	406 x 178 x 67 UB	14.17 in. long tee cleats manufactured from 305 x 127 x 48 UB type beam	Pinned-pinned (column)
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	406 x 178 x 67 UB	14.17 in. long tee cleats manufactured from 305 x 127 x 48 UB type beam	Pinned-pinned (column)
Kawano and Matsui 1997 Kawano and Matsui 1997 II	0.177 in. flange (smpl. tension) Fy=44.9 (smpl. tension) H200x100x3.2x4.5, H250x1000x6.0x6.0 (cruciform frame) Fy=43.11-55.35 (cruciform frame)	0.177 in. thick external diaphragms and vertical stiffeners manufactured from SS400 plates	Pinned-pinned (columns in cruciform frames)
Schneider and Alostaz 1998	W14 x 38 Girder Fy=44.3 (flange), 52.0 (web) Connection Stub Fy=48.2 (flange), 39.4 (web)	Connection stub with flared flange Connection stub web and/or flange continued into the column External diaphragm plate Deformed bars welded to the connection stub flange	Roller at the top and pinned at the bottom (column)
France, Davison, and Kirby 1999	457 x 152 x 52 UB 356 x 171 x 45 UB 254 x 146 x 31 UB Grade 43	Partial depth end plate (smaller than the beam sections) Flush end plate (same size with the girder section) Extended end plate (larger size than the girder section)	Pinned-pinned with fully-restraint or simple beam-to-column connections at the middle
Cheng, Hwang, and Chung 2000	H-600 x 200 x 11 x 17 Fy=44.67 (flange), 47.57 (web)	Through diaphragm plates with 3.94 in. opening at the middle External diaphragms	Pinned-pinned (column)
Elremaily and Azizinamini 2001	12 in. Diam. CFT Columns 16 in. Diam. CFT Columns	Fillet welds with hollow panel zone Full penetration and fillet welds with rebar with joint Web plate in joint zone	Pinned-pinned (column)
Kingsley et al. 2005	20 in. Diam. CFT Columns	Embedded Annular Ring	Cantilever Column
Cheng, Chan, and Chung 2007	350 x 350 x 9 mm CFT Columns H450 x 200 x 9 x 14 mm Composite beams	Web-through design of a continuous shear tab passing through the panel zone of the connection and applied shear studs on the inner tube wall with two shear-tabs on the outer tube wall to sandwich the beam web were compared	2 Cruciform Shape 2 Tee Shape Pinned-pinned (column)
Nie, Bai, and Cai 2008	Reinforced Concrete	Through-beam connection	Cruciform, pinned-pinned (column)
Lee, Kim, and Song 2008	CFT Column	Flat Plate Connection	Cantilever Column
Nie, Qin, and Cai 2008	H-Shape built-up sections	Vertical Stiffeners	Cantilever Column
Lehman and Roeder 2012	20 in. Diam. CFT Columns 30 in. Diam. CFT Columns	Embedded Monolithic Embedded Recessed	Cantilever Column

Cross Section Information

Reference	Tube Dimensions	Steel Properties	Concrete Properties
Dunberry, LeBlanc, and Redwood 1987	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 4.0-8.0 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.187-0.249 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 20.8-37.1	Class H Grade 50W Fy = 51.3-64.3 ksi	f'c = 2.25-4.29 ksi
Kamba, Kanatani, and Tabuchi 1991	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 8.52 x 8.52 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.177-0.315 (panel zone-web & flange) 0.315, 0.500 (column-web & flange) Diameter/thickness (D/t): 27, 36, 48 (panel zone) 17, 27 (column)	STK400 Fy = 48.4, 52.6 ksi (annealed) 54.07-56.92 ksi (cold-formed)	f'c = 3.37, 3.56 ksi
Prion and McLellan 1992	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 12 x 12, 8 x 8 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.472 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 25	Fy = 50.8 ksi	f'c = 6.53 ksi
Azizinamini and Prakash 1992	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 24 x 24 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.5 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 48	Fy = 36.1 ksi	f'c = 14.07 ksi
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 6.63, 8.63 (circular) 5.91 x 5.91, 7.87 x 7.87 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.197, 0.248 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 30.0-34.8	Fy = 44.0-60.2 ksi	f'c = 4.25-5.90 ksi
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 5.91 x 5.91 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.197 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 30	Fy = 47.9, 48.2 ksi	f'c = 4.54-4.90 ksi
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 5.91 x 5.91 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.197 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 30	Fy = 49.3, 49.8 ksi	f'c = 4.29-4.84 ksi
Kawano and Matsui 1997 Kawano and Matsui 1997 II	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 5.91 x 5.91 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.177 (simple tension) 0.166, 0.171 (cruciform frame) Diameter/thickness (D/t): 33.3 (simple tension) 34.5, 35.5 (cruciform frame)	Cold formed STKR400 Fy = 62.8 ksi	f'c = 4.97, 5.19 ksi
Schneider and Alostaz 1998	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 14 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.269 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 52.0	Fy = 57.5 ksi	f'c = 7.8-8.2 ksi
France, Davison, and Kirby 1999	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 29 x 29 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.248-0.492 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 31.8-9.7	Hot-rolled Grade 43 Fy = 44.5-61.9 ksi	f'c = 6.29-7.32 ksi
Cheng, Hwang, and Chung 2000	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 15.75 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.236, 0.394 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 40, 66.7	Cold-formed Fy = 45.5, 56.9 ksi	f'c = 3.77, 3.92 ksi
Elremaily and Azizinamini 2001	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 12, 16 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.252, 0.374 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 32, 47, 63	Fy = 53.8, 54.2, 64.3 ksi	f'c = 4.7-6.03 ksi
Kingsley et al. 2005	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 20 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.25 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 80	Fy = 76.3 ksi	f'c = 10-11 ksi
Cheng, Chan, and Chung 2007	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 13.8 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.354 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 39	Fy = 67 ksi	f'c = 3.55 (columns), 2.2 (floor) ksi
Nie, Bai, and Cai 2008	Square cross section with embedded circular concrete filled steel tube	Fy = 45, 49 ksi	f'c = 4.3-6.2 ksi
Lehman and Roeder 2012	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 15.75 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 1.575, 0.787 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 10, 13.7	Fy = 42.9-93.4 ksi	f'c = 2.48-4.20 ksi
Lehman and Roeder 2012	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 20, 30 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.25, 0.252 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 80, 119	Fy = 49-75 ksi	f'c = 7.83-11.89 ksi