Next Article in Journal
Impact of the Aging Process on the Ability of Decorative Materials Containing Biocides to Support Fungal Growth
Previous Article in Journal
Deformation Behaviors and Failure Mechanism of Coal Under Various Loading Rates Using Acoustic Emission and Digital Image Correlation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Buildings
Volume 14
Issue 12
10.3390/buildings14123857
buildings-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Experimental and Numerical Investigation on Behavior of Rectangular Closed Section Steel Truss Beams with Concrete-Filled Joints

by
Junlong He
1,*,
Fanlei Kong
2,*,
Pingming Huang
1 and
Kuihua Mei
1
1
School of Highway, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
2
School of Civil Engineering, Shandong Jiaotong University, Jinan 250357, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings 2024, 14(12), 3857; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14123857
Submission received: 4 November 2024 / Revised: 22 November 2024 / Accepted: 26 November 2024 / Published: 30 November 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Building Structures)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study investigates the flexural performance of steel trusses with concrete infill and gradient stiffeners at the joints. Three specimens were fabricated and subjected to flexural tests. A finite element model was developed and validated based on experimental results. This model was used to study the stiffness to evaluate the effects of concrete infill and gradient stiffeners at joints on the steel truss. The results demonstrated that all three specimens were subjected to joint tensile–compression failure. The ultimate bearing capacity of specimens with concrete infill and stiffening ribs increased by 29.7% and 35.6%, respectively. The displacement deformation of joints decreased by 21.6% and 18.9%, respectively, and the initial stiffness increased by 31.3% and 39.1%, respectively. Therefore, the concrete infill significantly enhanced the ultimate bearing capacity and flexural stiffness of the steel truss while reducing slip deformation at the joints. The concrete infill improved the deformation resistance of the joints and increased the overall stiffness of the structure. Gradient stiffeners had a limited effect on enhancing the ultimate bearing capacity and flexural stiffness but contributed to a smoother stress transition between filled and unfilled sections. This could also reduce stress distortion at the joints.

1. Introduction

Steel structure bridges are characterized by light weight, high strength, large flexural stiffness, and ease of prefabricated construction, making them a significant trend in the development of long-span bridges [1,2,3]. The joint connection techniques in steel truss bridges play a critical role in ensuring their safety and performance. Before 1970, prefabricated joint connections, such as rivets and bolts, were commonly used in steel truss bridges [4,5,6]. With advancements in welding technology, fully welded joints have been increasingly prevalent in the construction of new steel truss bridges [7,8,9]. However, fully welded joints are associated with issues like stress concentration at the weld toes, poor fatigue resistance, and high deformation potential [10,11,12,13]. Joints are crucial components of truss bridge structures, significantly contributing to structural stability and safety.
Tan [10] conducted a numerical analysis to investigate the effect of initial cracks in integral joints on fatigue life. The impact of different initial crack sizes, plate thicknesses, and initial crack angles on the stress intensity factor was also examined. Jiang [14,15,16,17,18] primarily focused on the behavior of connections between rectangular hollow section braces and concrete-filled rectangular hollow section chords reinforced by perforated ribs. The findings indicated that perforated ribs served as both stiffeners and shear connectors, effectively reducing the stress concentration factor. Cui [19] proposed using corner-fillet profiles and an ultrasonic impact treatment to remove stress concentration and residual welding stress in joints and experimentally assessed the feasibility of these approaches. Results demonstrated that fatigue resistance of the welded joints increased by 24% and 36% after applying the respective techniques. Wei [20] assessed the fatigue performance of welded integral joints in steel truss bridges through both experimental testing and finite element analysis and proposed a simplified equation for estimating the stress concentration factor in cope-hole details of tension members. Cai [21] assessed the applicability of the effective notch stress method to large T-joints in truss bridges through fatigue tests. The research results showed that the calculated fatigue strength using this method was more conservative than the experimental results. Wang [22] conducted fatigue tests using a 1:2 scale model of an ocean-crossing suspension bridge and proposed a multi-scale finite element method for detailed joint analysis, which closely matched the experimental data.
Current research on steel truss bridges primarily focuses on fatigue. However, the joints remain weak points in steel truss structures, and the load-bearing capacity and bending stiffness of the joints are also crucial to the safety of the bridges [23]. According to relevant statistics [24,25,26,27], between the 1870s and the 1970s, railway bridges in the United States, primarily truss bridges, disappeared at a rate of 25 bridges per year, with primary failure causes including insufficient load-bearing capacity of members, member instability, brittle fracture of steel, and joint plate failure [28,29], such as the collapse of the Mississippi River Bridge. In traditional rectangular steel tube truss bridges, installation errors lead to initial deformations in the steel trusses, resulting in stress concentration and additional bending moments at the joints. Under the P-Δ effect, the components at the joints are subjected to multi-directional stresses, causing the web members, chord members, and joint components to undergo slight warping and deformation. These slight warps and deformations will amplify away from the joints, eventually leading to increased displacement and stress concentration at the joints, causing truss failure. Enhancing the load-bearing capacity and bending stiffness of the joints can effectively mitigate this issue [30,31,32].
This paper investigates the performance of steel trusses with concrete infill and gradient stiffeners at the joints through both experimental testing and numerical simulations. This research primarily aims to evaluate the flexural load capacity and bending stiffness of steel trusses with such nodal configurations. Three steel truss specimens were constructed and tested for bending to determine their ultimate load-bearing capacity. A finite element model was developed, and a stress analysis was conducted on the concrete infill and gradient stiffeners at the joints to assess their impact on the stiffness of the steel truss. The results demonstrated the effectiveness of concrete-filled joints and stiffening ribs in enhancing the performance of steel truss beams and provided valuable insights for improving the structural integrity of steel truss connections in construction applications.

2. Experimental Program

2.1. Design of Specimens

To study the impact of joint changes on the load-bearing capacity of steel trusses, three specimens (designated as ST-1 to ST-3) were designed for flexure tests. The structural dimensions of the specimens are shown in Figure 1. The cross-sectional dimensions of the truss chords were 80 × 60 mm, with a steel plate thickness of 4.75 mm, while the cross-sectional dimensions of the truss webs were 60 × 60 mm, with a steel plate thickness of 5.75 mm [33]. All specimens were made of Q345qE. The three specimens had identical structural dimensions, differing only in the joint connection method. Specimen ST-1 used the conventional joint connection method. Specimen ST-2 had concrete filled at the joints, with a filled length of 240 mm at the chord and 80 mm at the web. The strength of the concrete was C30. Specimen ST-3 featured transition stiffening ribs at the end section where the concrete filling ends. The stiffening ribs were made of Q345qE with a steel plate thickness of 10 mm. The dimensions of the stiffening ribs were 27.5 × 137.5 mm at the chords and 20 × 80 mm at the webs.
The loading test specimens were designed and fabricated based on the guidelines from the literature [33], while also considering the conditions of the loading equipment. To minimize the impact of welding, finished rectangular steel pipes were used for the steel truss. Additionally, three sets of lateral braces were designed to ensure the stability of the specimens. Rectangular steel pipes and lateral braces are shown in Figure 2. Before the concrete was poured, foam blocks were placed at the corresponding positions inside the chords and webs as templates. Concrete and steel trusses interact through adhesive friction, and expansion agents were added to reduce concrete shrinkage. To install the stiffening ribs, holes were first drilled at the designated positions on the webs or chords, after which the stiffening rib plates were inserted and welded to the steel plates of the webs or chords. The welded surface was then ground smooth, ensuring that the welding strength was not lower than that of the base material.

2.2. Test Program

Figure 3 shows the load setup of specimens from different perspectives. The loading device applied in this study was an electro-hydraulic servo press controlled by a 5000 kN microcomputer. To maintain the stability of the steel truss structure during the experiment, three sets of lateral braces were designed and mounted on the test platform. After the specimen was installed, geometric alignment was performed. Prior to formal loading, three preloading cycles were applied to the specimen to eliminate non-elastic deformation and ensure the data acquisition system was functioning correctly. The preload was 50 kN, applied in five stages, with each stage having a load of 10 kN, and held for 5 min. The formal loading was divided into two stages: load control and displacement control. In the first stage of load control, the maximum load for each specimen (80% of the expected failure load) was applied initially, followed by an increase from 0 to the maximum load at a rate of 2 kN/s. When the load value reached 80% of the expected failure load, the system automatically transitioned to the displacement control phase, with a loading rate of 0.2 mm/min [33].

2.3. Measurement Content and Point Arrangement

The test parameters included surface strain of the steel truss, deflection, and applied load values. Strain measurement points were distributed near the joints of the steel truss, while deflection measurement points were located at the mid-span and at the joints of the lower chord members. Figure 4 shows the positions and quantities of the strain and deflection measurement points. In Figure 4, L1-16 and R1-16 are the numbers of strain gauges, while LDT1-2, MDT, and RDT1-2 are the numbers of displacement transducers. L represents the left side, R represents the left side, M represents the middle, and DT denotes the displacement transducer. The distances from the intersection of the web chord’s centerline (refer to Figure 1a) to points L1 and L2 are 270 mm and 140 mm, respectively. The distances from the top surface of the lower chord to points L3 and L4 are 60 mm and 105 mm, respectively. Points L5, L6, L7, and L8 are symmetrically arranged with respect to points L4, L3, L2, and L1, respectively. The distances from the intersection of the web chord’s centerline to points L15 and L16 are both 60 mm. Points L9 to L14 are located directly beneath points L8, L7, L16, L15, L2, and L1, respectively. The distances from the intersection of the web chord’s centerline to points LDT1 and LDT2 are both 100 mm, with MDT located at the mid-span. The positions of the measurement points at the joints on the right side are symmetrically identical to those on the left side. Strain and deflection data were collected using strain gauges and displacement transducers in conjunction with a dynamic-static acquisition system, with a sampling frequency of 1 Hz. The applied load values were directly read from the computer.

2.4. Material Properties

Before the experiment, mechanical performance tests were conducted on the primary materials. The concrete mixture consisted of cement, sand, crushed stone, mineral powder, fly ash, and water. The quantities per cubic meter of concrete were as follows: 230 kg of cement, 829 kg of sand, 1020 kg of crushed stone, 80 kg of mineral powder, 70 kg of fly ash, and 155 kg of water. The water-to-cement ratio is 0.42. To ensure the density of the concrete, the maximum particle size of the aggregate is limited to 15 mm. To minimize the shrinkage of the concrete, an expansion agent was incorporated into the mix. The expansion rate of the concrete was 4.0 × 10−4, and the slump value is 180 mm. After curing for 28 days under the same conditions as the loading time, the average compressive strength of the standard concrete specimens was found to be 32.3 MPa. Figure 5 illustrates the equipment used for testing the mechanical properties of the steel and the dimensions of the specimens. Figure 5a depicts the tensile testing equipment, Figure 5b shows the specimen dimensions, and Figure 5c displays the specimens after tensile failure. The results of the tensile tests on the steel plates are provided in Table 1.

3. Experimental Result Analysis

3.1. Failure Mode

Figure 6 shows the failure modes of the specimens. All three specimens exhibited a consistent failure pattern but experienced different failure processes. At the beginning of loading, no significant phenomena were observed. As the load increased, slight vertical displacements in the steel truss of specimen ST-1 were noted by displacement meters, but no noticeable issues were evident in the specimen itself. No displacement was observed in the other two specimens under the same load. As loading continued, specimens ST-2 and ST-3 began to experience displacement, while the deformation specimen ST-1 began to appear, primarily at two joints in the middle of the lower chord members, showing an up-and-down shifting deformation pattern. With further load increase, test specimens ST-2 and ST-3 began to deform, and the deformation of all specimens gradually increased. However, for the same load, the deformation of specimens ST-2 and ST-3 was always smaller than that of specimen ST-1. The deformation of specimen ST-3 was more uniform compared to specimen ST-2, and the overall performance was better. When the load reached 82% of the ultimate value, cracks began to form at the connections between the web members and the lower chord members of specimens ST-1. These cracks progressed as the load increased, and when the load reached its ultimate level, the cracks became through-and-through, leading to the rupture of the connections and the failure of the specimens. However, no cracks appeared when specimens ST-2 and ST-3 were damaged. The steel truss ultimately exhibited a tensile–compression failure mode at the joints. When damaged, specimens ST-2 and ST-3 exhibited relatively small nodal displacement deformation compared to specimen ST-1.

3.2. Load–Displacement Curves

Figure 7 shows the load–deflection displacement curves of the specimens. According to the results measured by the MDT displacement gauges, the load–displacement curves of all three specimens showed a similar pattern. During the initial testing phase, the specimens showed a linear load–displacement relationship, indicating that they were in the elastic phase. As the load increased, the slope of the curve gradually decreased, and the deflection developed more rapidly until the peak load was reached, indicating that the specimens entered the elastoplastic phase. Once the load reached its ultimate value, it began to decrease, and the specimens’ deformation and deflection increased significantly until failure occurred. Due to the symmetric arrangement of the displacement gauges (refer to Figure 4), the displacements recorded by LDT-1 and RDT-1 in all three specimens were the same, and the displacements recorded by LDT-2 and RDT-2 were also the same. The measurements from the LDT and RDT displacement gauges revealed that, during the loading process, the lower chord members at both joints of the specimens underwent vertical shear deformation due to the tensile and compressive loads. In all specimens, the damage displacements for LDT-2 and RDT-2 were greater than those for LDT-1 and RDT-1. This was because LDT-2 and RDT-2 were located near the compressed web chords, where the truss underwent downward deformation, and the displacement gauges measured a large damage displacement. LDT-1 and RDT-1 were located near the tensile web chords, where the deformation of the chord was minimal, so the displacement gauges recorded small damage displacements.
Table 2 shows the experimental results. Py is the load value at the yield point of the steel truss, and δy, δy1, and δy2 refer to the displacements at the mid-span and two joints under the yield load (Py). Pu denotes the ultimate load value, with δu, δu1, and δu2 corresponding to the displacements at the mid-span and two joints under the ultimate load (Pu).
The ultimate bearing capacity of ST-2 was 143.1 kN higher than that of ST-1 (approximately 29.7%), while the mid-span displacement of ST-2 was decreased by 2.7 mm compared to ST-1. The only difference between specimens ST-2 and ST-1 was the filled concrete at the joints. Therefore, filling concrete at the joints can significantly enhance the bearing capacity and stiffness of the steel truss. It was also observed that the ultimate bearing capacity of ST-3 was 28.3 kN higher than ST-2 (approximately 4.5%), with the mid-span displacement of ST-3 decreasing by 0.7 mm compared to ST-2. The only difference between specimens ST-3 and ST-2 was the presence of gradient stiffening ribs. Thus, incorporating gradient stiffening ribs at the concrete end section also improved the ultimate bearing capacity and stiffness of the steel truss. Under ultimate load, the vertical displacement values at the joints for specimens ST-1, ST-2, and ST-3 were 3.7 mm, 2.8 mm, and 2.0 mm, respectively. These values decreased progressively, indicating that filled concrete at the joints and adding gradient stiffening ribs could effectively reduce joint deformation and increase joint stiffness.

3.3. Load–Stiffness Curves

Figure 8 shows the load–stiffness curves of the specimens. Figure 9 shows a comparison of the stiffness of the specimens. The initial stiffness of specimens ST-1, ST-2, and ST-3 was 48.6 kN/mm, 63.8 kN/mm, and 67.6 kN/mm, respectively. The initial stiffness of ST-2 was 15.2 kN/mm higher than that of ST-1 (approximately 31.3%), and the initial stiffness of ST-3 was 19.0 kN/mm higher than ST-1 (approximately 39.1%). Therefore, filled concrete at the joints significantly enhanced the stiffness of the steel truss. The initial stiffness of ST-3 was only 3.8 kN/mm higher than ST-2 (approximately 6.0%). Therefore, the effect of setting gradient stiffening ribs on improving the initial stiffness of steel trusses was not significant.
In practice, 0.9Pu (where Pu represents the maximum load capacity) is commonly used as the characteristic load capacity. Thus, the characteristic load capacity of ST-1 was 433.5 kN. At this load of 433.5 kN, the stiffness values for ST-1, ST-2, and ST-3 were 28.1 kN/mm, 48.1 kN/mm, and 54.3 kN/mm, respectively. The stiffness of ST-2 was 17.2 kN/mm higher than that of ST-1 (about 61.2%), while ST-3’s stiffness was 20.0 kN/mm higher than ST-1 (about 71.2%). This indicates that filled concrete at the joints greatly improved the stiffness of the steel truss during its service phase. The stiffness of ST-3 was only 6.2 kN/mm more than ST-2 (around 12.9%), suggesting that gradient stiffening ribs had a minimal impact on enhancing the stiffness of the steel truss during the service stage.

3.4. Strain Distribution

Figure 10 shows the load–strain curves of the specimens. The strains at the left and right joints were symmetrically arranged and exhibited similar development trends; therefore, the strain values were the average results from gauges placed at corresponding positions. Concrete filled at the joints significantly reduced the stress concentration areas. With the addition of gradient stiffening ribs at section transitions, the stress distribution across the section became more uniform. Both concrete-filled joints and gradient stiffening ribs not only reduced stress concentration but also limited the deformation of the joints, thereby enhancing the stiffness of the joints and, in turn, improving the overall stiffness.
However, it should be noted that all tests were performed only once, and, therefore, there was no redundancy in the test results. More tests were needed to derive reliable results in the next step.

4. Numerical Analysis

4.1. Finite Element Model and Validation

The finite element model was developed using ABAQUS 2022 to examine the mechanical behavior of the steel truss with concrete filled at the joints and gradient stiffening ribs. The solver used in the analysis is dynamic and explicit, considering both geometric and material nonlinearities. Figure 11 shows half of the finite element model, which included upper chords, lower chords, web members, concrete, gradient stiffening ribs, bearing blocks, and supports. Limit the movement of nodes on the symmetry plane in the Z direction and rotation in the X and Y directions. Steel bearing blocks were represented as rigid bodies, with loads applied in the Y direction through a reference point (RP1). Supports were also modeled as rigid bodies, with constraints applied in the X and Y directions through a reference point (RP2) to define hinge supports. To prevent instability of the specimen during loading, an X-direction constraint was applied on the web chord through reference points RP-3 and RP-4. Solid components were represented using three-dimensional 8-node linear hexahedral elements (C3D8R). The global mesh size was set as 10 mm, and finer grids were used for concrete and stiffening ribs, with a mesh size set to 5 mm. The steel truss and stiffening ribs (grade Q345qE) were assumed to possess an elastic-perfectly platic behavior in tension and compression. The elastic modulus and yield strength of the steel truss and stiffening ribs were 206 GPa and 350 MPa, according to references [34] and mechanical performance tests. The von Mises criterion was used to describe isotropic yielding. A tie constraint was employed to simulate the interaction between the gradient stiffening ribs and the steel truss. Surface contact modeling was used between the concrete and the steel truss, with the steel truss as the master surface and the concrete as the slave surface. The normal and tangential interactions between the surfaces were defined using a “hard contact” algorithm with a friction coefficient of 0.2 and a “penalty friction” algorithm, respectively.
To validate the finite element model, three node connection configurations were considered: the conventional node connection, the node connection filled with concrete, and the node connection with gradient stiffening ribs. Figure 12 shows a comparison between the finite element model results for these three specimens and the experimental data. The load–deflection curves from both experimental results and numerical analysis were in reasonable agreement, confirming the accuracy of the finite element model.

4.2. Joint Analysis

Figure 13 shows the stress distribution for the specimens at the characteristic load value (0.9Pu) [35], which was 433.5 kN, with ST-1 as the reference specimen. According to the numerical analysis, filled concrete at the joints of rectangular steel tubes mitigated local deformation, prevented premature stress concentration, and delayed yielding at the joints. This enhancement in local stiffness translated into increased overall stiffness and ultimate load capacity. The infill concrete and addition of stiffening ribs greatly improved the distribution of principal tensile stress at the joints, resulting in reduced and more uniform principal tensile stress and significantly curtailing joint deformation. The stress uniformity at the joints continually improved, and with the addition of stiffening ribs, the stress transition across the section on the bending side became smoother.
Figure 14 shows the strain distribution of the concrete infill within the joint. Under the condition that the concrete worked in coordination with the external steel tube, it effectively shared part of the stress, reduced the stress on the external steel, and delayed the yielding of the steel. Through the entire process of structural stress, effective connection between concrete and steel truss could be achieved only through adhesive friction before the specimen reached its ultimate bearing capacity. However, after reaching the ultimate bearing capacity, due to the cracking and compression of the concrete, the connection between the concrete and the steel truss failed, and the displacement of the specimen developed rapidly.
Figure 15 shows the strain distribution of the transition stiffening ribs within the joint. Due to microscopic distortions at the joint, the overall model exhibited some bending moments. The internal stiffening ribs of the steel tube distributed certain bending stresses when subjected to bending, thus contributing to the stiffness of the joint. However, for members where axial forces dominate, the effect of the stiffening ribs was not significant because they were not continuously arranged. Nonetheless, the presence of the stiffening ribs ensured a smoother stress transition between the infilled and non-infilled sections.

5. Conclusions

This paper presents a steel truss structure with concrete-filled and gradient stiffening ribs at the joints. Both experimental and numerical analyses were conducted. The following conclusions are drawn:
(1) The flexure tests indicate that all three specimens experienced joint tensile–compression failure, with significant displacement deformation at the joints before failure. Among them, the conventional joint specimen exhibited the largest deformation, while specimens with concrete-filled and stiffening ribs at the joints showed significantly reduced deformation.
(2) The load–displacement curves for all three specimens exhibit similar trends. Concrete-filled joints and gradient stiffening ribs at the joints could significantly increase the ultimate load capacity and bending stiffness of specimens.
(3) A finite element model was developed, which accurately predicted the load-displacement curves for the steel trusses with concrete-filled joints and gradient stiffening ribs at the joints. The finite element model was used to study the stiffness of the steel truss with concrete-filled joints and gradient stiffening ribs at the joints.
(4) The rectangular steel tube constrains the infilled concrete, leading to multidirectional stress on the concrete and increased compressive strength, which enhanced the deformation resistance at the joints, reduced joint displacement deformation, and improved the overall stiffness of the structure. The gradient stiffening ribs resulted in a smoother transition of stresses between infilled and non-infilled sections and reduced stress distortion at the joints.

Author Contributions

Methodology, J.H., F.K., P.H. and K.M.; Software, J.H. and F.K.; Validation, J.H.; Resources, F.K. and K.M.; Writing—review & editing, J.H., P.H. and K.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China. (51878058) and the Transportation Technology Innovation Program Project of Shandong Province, China (2024B110-04).

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Tan, Y.; Zhu, B.; Qi, L.; Yan, T.; Wan, T.; Yang, W. Mechanical Behavior and Failure Mode of Steel–Concrete Connection Joints in a Hybrid Truss Bridge: Experimental Investigation. Materials 2020, 13, 2549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Liu, Y.J.; Ma, Y.P.; Tian, Z.J.; Yuan, Z.Y.; Xiong, Z.H.; Yang, J. Field test of rectangular concrete filled steel tubular composite truss bridge with continuous rigid system. China J. Highw. Transp. 2018, 31, 53–62. [Google Scholar]
  3. Han, L.H.; Mu, T.M.; Wang, F.C.; Fan, B.K.; Li, W.; Liang, J.; Hou, C. Design theory of CFST (concrete filled steel tubular) mixed structures and its applications in bridge engineering. China Civ. Eng. J. 2020, 53, 1–24. [Google Scholar]
  4. Piao, L.; Yuan, J.; Ma, N.; Yue, C.; Wang, R.; Zheng, G. Welding Residual Stress Elimination Technique in the Top Chord of Main Truss of Steel Truss Bridge. Buildings 2023, 13, 1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jiang, L.; Liu, Y.; Fam, A.; Liu, B.; Pu, B.; Zhao, R. Experimental and numerical analyses on stress concentration factors of concrete-filled welded integral K-joints in steel truss bridges. Thin Wall. Struct. 2023, 183, 110347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wang, G.X.; Ding, Y.L. The interface friction in the friction-type bolted joint of steel truss bridge: Case study. Balt. J. Road Bridge E 2020, 15, 187–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Liu, B.; Liu, Y.; Jiang, L.; Wang, K. Flexural behavior of concrete-filled rectangular steel tubular composite truss beams in the negative moment region. Eng. Struct. 2020, 216, 110738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Meng, B.; Du, Q.; Li, H.; Li, L.; Du, Y.; Li, F. Improving seismic performance of fully welded connection based on truss beam segments. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2023, 211, 108080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Song, L.; Yan, W.; Yu, C.; Xie, Z.; Tan, Q. Flexural behavior investigation of the CFS truss beams with self-piercing riveted connection. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2019, 156, 28–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tan, H.; Hu, X.; Wu, X.; Zeng, Y.; Tu, X.; Xu, X.; Qian, J. Initial crack propagation of integral joint in steel truss arch bridges and its fatigue life accession. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2021, 130, 105777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Tong, L.; Chen, K.; Xu, G.; Zhao, X. Formulae for hot-spot stress concentration factors of concrete-filled CHS T-joints based on experiments and FE analysis. Thin Wall. Struct. 2019, 136, 113–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Liu, P.; Lu, H.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, J.; An, L.; Wang, Y. Fatigue Performance Evaluation of K-Type Joints in Long-Span Steel Truss Arch Bridge. Metals 2022, 12, 1700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Matti, F.N.; Mashiri, F.R. Experimental and numerical studies on SCFs of SHS T-joints subjected to static out-of-plane bending. Thin Wall. Struct. 2020, 146, 106453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Jiang, L.; Liu, Y.; Fam, A.; Liu, J.; Liu, B. Stress concentration factor parametric formulae for concrete-filled rectangular hollow section K-joints with perfobond ribs. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2019, 160, 579–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jiang, L.; Liu, Y.; Fam, A. Stress concentration factors in concrete-filled square hollow section joints with perfobond ribs. Eng. Struct. 2019, 181, 165–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Jiang, L.; Liu, Y.; Fam, A.; Wang, K. Fatigue behaviour of non-integral Yjoint of concrete-filled rectangular hollow section continuous chord stiffened with perfobond ribs. Eng. Struct. 2019, 191, 611–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Jiang, L.; Liu, Y.; Liu, J.; Liu, B. Experimental and numerical analysis of the stress concentration factor for concrete-filled square hollow section Y-joints. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2020, 23, 869–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jiang, L.; Liu, Y.; Fam, A.; Liu, B.; Long, X. Fatigue behavior of integral builtup box Y-joints between concrete-filled chords with perfobond ribs and hollow braces. J. Struct. Eng. 2020, 146, 04019218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Cui, C.; Zhang, Q.; Bao, Y.; Kang, J.; Bu, Y. Fatigue performance and evaluation of welded joints in steel truss bridges. J. Constr. Steel. Res. 2018, 148, 450–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wei, X.; Xiao, L.; Pei, S.L. Fatigue assessment and stress analysis of cope-hole details in welded joints of steel truss bridge. Int. J. Fatigue 2017, 100, 136–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Cai, S.; Chen, W.; Kashani, M.M.; Vardanega, P.J.; Taylor, C.A. Fatigue life assessment of large scale T-jointed steel truss bridge components. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2017, 133, 499–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wang, H.L.; Gao, H.; Qin, S.F. Fatigue performance analysis and experimental study of steel trusses integral joint based on multi-scale FEM. Eng. Rev. 2017, 37, 257–262. [Google Scholar]
  23. Ma, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, K.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Z. Axial stiffness of concrete filled rectangular steel tubular (CFRST) truss joints. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2021, 184, 106820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zhu, Q.-X.; Wang, H.; Mao, J.-X.; Wan, H.-P.; Zheng, W.-Z.; Zhang, Y.-M. Investigation of temperature effects on steel-truss bridge based on long-term monitoring data: Case study. J. Bridge Eng. 2020, 25, 05020007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Azim, M.R.; Gül, M. Damage Detection of Steel-Truss Railway Bridges Using Operational Vibration Data. J. Struct. Eng. 2020, 146, 0002547. [Google Scholar]
  26. Torres, B.; Poveda, P.; Ivorra, S.; Estevan, L. Long-term static and dynamic monitoring to failure scenarios assessment in steel truss railway bridges: A case study. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2023, 152, 107435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Sangiorgio, V.; Nettis, A.; Uva, G.; Pellegrino, F.; Varum, H.; Adam, J.M. Analytical fault tree and diagnostic aids for the preservation of historical steel truss bridges. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2022, 133, 105996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Parisi, F.; Mangini, A.; Fanti, M.; Adam, J.M. Automated location of steel truss bridge damage using machine learning and raw strain sensor data. Autom. Constr. 2022, 138, 104249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. López, S.; Makoond, N.; Sánchez-Rodríguez, A.; Adam, J.M.; Riveiro, B. Learning from failure propagation in steel truss bridges. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2023, 152, 107488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kong, W.; Huang, Y.; Guo, Z.; Zhang, X.; Chen, Y. Experimental study on square hollow stainless steel tube trusses with three joint types and different brace widths under vertical loads. Rev. Adv. Mater. Sci. 2021, 60, 519–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ma, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, K.; Ma, T.; Yang, J.; Liu, J.; Gao, Y.; Li, H. Flexural behavior of concrete-filled rectangular steel tubular (CFRST) trusses. Structures 2022, 36, 32–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Huang, P.; He, J.; Kong, F.; Mei, K.; Li, X. Experimental study on the bearing capacity of PZ shape composite dowel shear connectors with elliptical holes. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 2457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Liu, J.P.; Liu, Y.J. Effect of concrete filled in chord tube on the mechanical behavior of RHS steel tube joints. J. Xi’an. Nuiv. Arch. Tech. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) China 2011, 43, 19–24. [Google Scholar]
  34. Cheng, Z.; Zhang, Q.; Bao, Y.; Deng, P.; Wei, C.; Li, M. Flexural behavior of corrugated steel-UHPC composite bridge decks. Eng. Struct. 2021, 246, 113066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kong, F.; Huang, P.; Han, B.; Wang, X.; Liu, C. Experimental study on behavior of corrugated steel-concrete composite bridge decks with MCL shape composite dowels. Eng. Struct. 2021, 227, 111399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Buildings 14 03857 g001
Figure 1. Schematic of the specimen: (a) ST-1; (b) ST-2; and (c) ST-3.
Figure 1. Schematic of the specimen: (a) ST-1; (b) ST-2; and (c) ST-3.
Buildings 14 03857 g001
Buildings 14 03857 g002
Figure 2. Test specimen production process.
Figure 2. Test specimen production process.
Buildings 14 03857 g002
Buildings 14 03857 g003
Figure 3. Load setup of specimens from different perspectives.
Figure 3. Load setup of specimens from different perspectives.
Buildings 14 03857 g003
Buildings 14 03857 g004
Figure 4. Arrangement of measurement points.
Figure 4. Arrangement of measurement points.
Buildings 14 03857 g004
Buildings 14 03857 g005
Figure 5. Test setup for material properties: (a) tensile testing equipment; (b) specimen dimensions; and (c) specimens after tensile failure.
Figure 5. Test setup for material properties: (a) tensile testing equipment; (b) specimen dimensions; and (c) specimens after tensile failure.
Buildings 14 03857 g005
Buildings 14 03857 g006
Figure 6. Failure mode of the specimens.
Figure 6. Failure mode of the specimens.
Buildings 14 03857 g006
Buildings 14 03857 g007aBuildings 14 03857 g007b
Figure 7. Load–displacement curve: (a) ST-1; (b) ST-2; and (c) ST-3.
Figure 7. Load–displacement curve: (a) ST-1; (b) ST-2; and (c) ST-3.
Buildings 14 03857 g007aBuildings 14 03857 g007b
Buildings 14 03857 g008
Figure 8. Load–stiffness relationship.
Figure 8. Load–stiffness relationship.
Buildings 14 03857 g008
Buildings 14 03857 g009
Figure 9. Comparison of stiffness.
Figure 9. Comparison of stiffness.
Buildings 14 03857 g009
Buildings 14 03857 g010
Figure 10. Load–strain relationship: (a) ST-1; (b) ST-2; (c) ST-3.
Figure 10. Load–strain relationship: (a) ST-1; (b) ST-2; (c) ST-3.
Buildings 14 03857 g010
Buildings 14 03857 g011
Figure 11. The finite element mode.
Figure 11. The finite element mode.
Buildings 14 03857 g011
Buildings 14 03857 g012
Figure 12. Comparison of experimental (ST) and numerical (NAL) results.
Figure 12. Comparison of experimental (ST) and numerical (NAL) results.
Buildings 14 03857 g012
Buildings 14 03857 g013aBuildings 14 03857 g013b
Figure 13. Stress distribution: (a) ST-1; (b) ST-2; (c) ST-3.
Figure 13. Stress distribution: (a) ST-1; (b) ST-2; (c) ST-3.
Buildings 14 03857 g013aBuildings 14 03857 g013b
Buildings 14 03857 g014
Figure 14. Stress distribution of concrete in specimen ST-3.
Figure 14. Stress distribution of concrete in specimen ST-3.
Buildings 14 03857 g014
Buildings 14 03857 g015
Figure 15. Stress distribution of stiffeners in specimen ST-3.
Figure 15. Stress distribution of stiffeners in specimen ST-3.
Buildings 14 03857 g015
Table 1. Material properties of steel.
Table 1. Material properties of steel.
TypeYield Strength/
MPa.		Average/
MPa		Ultimate Strength/
MPa		Average/
MPa
Upper chord
(DB1-DB3)		352.3352.3499.5499.3
351.7498.6
352.9499.8
Lower chord
(CB1-CB3)		350.8350.2497.3496.9
349.6496.4
350.2497.0
Table 2. Summary of experimental results.
Table 2. Summary of experimental results.
SpecimenPy/kNδy/mmδy1/mmδy2/mmPu/kNδu/mmδu1/mmδu2/mm
ST-1313.47.86.26.8481.723.517.220.9
ST-2409.67.35.76.4624.820.816.819.7
ST-3433.56.95.56.2653.120.116.519.5
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

He, J.; Kong, F.; Huang, P.; Mei, K. Experimental and Numerical Investigation on Behavior of Rectangular Closed Section Steel Truss Beams with Concrete-Filled Joints. Buildings 2024, 14, 3857. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14123857

AMA Style

He J, Kong F, Huang P, Mei K. Experimental and Numerical Investigation on Behavior of Rectangular Closed Section Steel Truss Beams with Concrete-Filled Joints. Buildings. 2024; 14(12):3857. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14123857

Chicago/Turabian Style

He, Junlong, Fanlei Kong, Pingming Huang, and Kuihua Mei. 2024. "Experimental and Numerical Investigation on Behavior of Rectangular Closed Section Steel Truss Beams with Concrete-Filled Joints" Buildings 14, no. 12: 3857. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14123857

APA Style

He, J., Kong, F., Huang, P., & Mei, K. (2024). Experimental and Numerical Investigation on Behavior of Rectangular Closed Section Steel Truss Beams with Concrete-Filled Joints. Buildings, 14(12), 3857. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14123857

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop