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 relationshops	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

Specimen Information

Reference	Beam Information	Connection Information	End Conditions
Dunberry, LeBlanc, and Redwood 1987	N.A
Kamba, Kanatani, and Tabuchi 1991	N.A
Prion and McLellan 1992	N.A
Azizinamini and Prakash 1992	W30 x 99
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	406 x 178 x 67 UB
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	406 x 178 x 67 UB
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996	406 x 178 x 67 UB
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)
Schneider and Alostaz 1998	W14 x 38 Girder Fy=44.3 (flange), 52.0 (web) Connection Stub Fy=48.2 (flange), 39.4 (web)
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
Cheng, Hwang, and Chung 2000	H-600 x 200 x 11 x 17 Fy=44.67 (flange), 47.57 (web)

Cross Section Information

Reference	Tube Dimensions	Steel Properties	Concrete Properties
Dunberry, LeBlanc, and Redwood 1987			f'c = 2.25-4.29 ksi
Kamba, Kanatani, and Tabuchi 1991			f'c = 3.37, 3.56 ksi
Prion and McLellan 1992			f'c = 6.53 ksi
Azizinamini and Prakash 1992			f'c = 14.07 ksi
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996			f'c = 4.25-5.90 ksi
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996			f'c = 4.54-4.90 ksi
Shakir-Khalil and Al-Rawdan 1995, 1996			f'c = 4.29-4.84 ksi
Kawano and Matsui 1997 Kawano and Matsui 1997 II			f'c = 4.97, 5.19 ksi
Schneider and Alostaz 1998			f'c = 7.8-8.2 ksi
France, Davison, and Kirby 1999			f'c = 6.29-7.32 ksi
Cheng, Hwang, and Chung 2000			f'c = 3.77, 3.92 ksi