 Open Access
 Authors : Beegam Fathima
 Paper ID : IJERTV10IS060184
 Volume & Issue : Volume 10, Issue 06 (June 2021)
 Published (First Online): 18062021
 ISSN (Online) : 22780181
 Publisher Name : IJERT
 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Rotation Capacity of Plastic Hinges & Allowable Degree of Moment Redistribution of Ductile Flexural Members
Beegam Fathima
MTech Student (Structural) Dept.of Civil Engineering YCET, Kollam, India
Abstract The thesis aims to study the plastic hinge region behaviour of ductile concrete members with variations in mechanical properties, boundary conditions, and geometric properties. The particular areas of investigation will be reinforcement yielding location, plastic strain distribution, and curvature localization region.Proposed equations for plastic hinge length will be incorporated into a mechanicsbased approach to predict rotational capacity of flexural members.he study will help practicing engineers and researchers simulate the performance of ductile concrete members in a computationally efficient manner.
Keywords ETABS, Ductile Concrete, Plastic Hinge, Rotation Capacity, Pushover Analysis

INTRODUCTION
Plastic hinge refers to deformation of part of beam wherever plastic bending occur. For RC flexural members, plastic deformation is localized in the plastic hinge zone after yielding of members. Generally formed at the supports, point of maximum bending, under concentrated load. Eg. : For a simply supported beam subjected to point load, plastic hinges will occur at the position of point load. For a steel, the stress strain behaviour ends at elastic limit of the body, then it will vary at different rate. After the achievement of elastic state, the rate of strain is much larger than that of change in stress. At a point, stress got zero increment while the strain keep on increasing, this stress is called yield stress. Further force cause no increase in stress but an increase in strain, this state is called plastic state. In structural elements like beam, at maximum deflection condition, this stage is achieved. ie., the beginning of formation of plastic hinges.When the body become fully plastic, at point of application of load, it is said that it has infinite strain value. Strain is only resisted by a constant moment, which develops at plastic hinges, called plastic moment. The load at which this condition achieved is called collapse load, structure deforms at a greater rate with constant resisting moment.
Hinge means that having no capability to resist moment, so the plastic hinge behaves like a standard hinge permitting free rotation. The assessment of the plastic rotation of reinforced concrete members is an essential aspect to avoid structural brittle collapse. Rotation capacity of a joint in a structural member under constant moment depends on characteristics of the formation of plastic hinge. The value of plastic hinge length depends upon the load distribution and cross section of beams.
Moment redistribution refers to the behaviour of statically indeterminate structures that are not completely plastic, but have some reserve plastic capacity. When one location first yields, further application of load to the structure causes redistribution of moment. When the load is applied to the beam, it has the property to resist it. When the beam is indeterminate, it forms sufficient number of hinges to make itself determinate. Further increment in load does not increase the moment at the point where plastic hinges are formed. The increased load increases the moment in the less stressed section of beam. The process of shift of application of moment in the beam is termed as moment redistribution in a beam. It is economical to allow redistribution of negative moments, it exploits the ductility of RC beams. Reduces the complexity of reinforcement detailing at beamcolumn junction and accommodates more space for concrete pouring. Ductility is an important property of structural members that allows large deformation and deflection to occur under overload condition. It is an important design parameter, where intense confinement should be provided to increase the ductility of members. It provides warning of failure for statically determinate beams and allows moment redistribution to occur in statically indeterminate beam at overload. The ductility of member can be determined from moment curvature relation, where large deformations indicate better ductility. Ductility can be increased by increasing compression steel content, increasing compressive strength and increase in ultimate concrete strain. It can be reduced by increasing tension steel content, increase in steel yield
strength and increase in axial load.

OBJECTIVES

To study and optimize the plastic hinge region behaviour of ductile concrete members

To determine the ductility demand and maximum capacity of the structure with respect to percentage moment redistribution

To determine the ductility demand and maximum capacity of structure with respect to rotation capacity of hinges

To determine the relationship of percentage moment redistribution and rotation capacity of beam hinges on response of special moment resisting frame


METHODOLOGY
Data Collection
Literature Review
Data Collection
Literature Review
Software Study
Validation
Software Study
Validation
Modelling
Analysis
Modelling
Analysis
Result&Discussion
Result&Discussion
TABLE 1: BUIDING DETAILS
Sl no.
Component
Values
1
Model
G+8
2
Storey height
3.2m
3
Beam
250x500mm
4
Column
450x450mm
5
Wall thickness
200mm
6
Material
M25
7
Grade of steel
Fe415
9
Slab thickness
150mm
10
Seismic zone
3
11
Importance factor
1
12
Type of soil
Medium
13
Type of structure
Concrete
14
Response reduction factor
5
15
Live load
3kN/m2
16
Roof load
1.5kN/m2

MODELLING
The building is considered to be situated in zone 3(Kerala). As per IS 456, building is considered as SMRF. ETABS implement the plastic hinge properties as FEMA 356 or ATC 40. Hinges are assigned when once the structure is modelled.
Fig 1: 3Dmodel

ANALYSIS

Equivalent Static Analysis
The natural period of building is calculated by the empirical expression prescribed in the code. The total design seismic base shear calculation and its distribution along the height are done as per IS 1893(partI)2002. The seismic weight is calculated using full dead load plus 25% of live load.

Pushover Analysis
First pushover analysis is done for gravity loads incrementally under load control. Later the subsequent lateral pushover load case is specified to start from final conditions of gravity pushover load case. Lateral load applied is obtained from ESA. Moment rotation values are assigned to all members by carrying out moment curvature analysis based on section propertes and reinforcement details at the hinge location. For column moment rotation values are obtained for constant axial compressive load. The flexural M3 hinges are assigned for beam elements and PM2M3 hinges are assigned for column elements. These values are generated based on material model for concrete and steel, by using equilibrium and compatibility equation for each element. Where, M3= rotational hinge about major axis, M2= rotational hinge about minor axis and P= compression hinge.
Various parameters are used to study the plastic hinge region behaviour of ductile flexural members. These parameters are varied by 50% from the actual and the plastic hinge region behaviour were analysed.
A.Stiffness
Stiffness is increased and decreased by 50% from the actual and the behaviour is analysed.
Fig 2: Moment redistribution v/s stiffness
Fig 3: Maximum rotation capacity v/s stiffness
From the graph, Moment increases when stiffness is varied 50% and rotation capacity is higher for beam with less stiffness.
Fig 4: Hinge formation corresponds to stiffness
From the figure, Hinge formation is almost same when stiffness varied by 50%.
B.Shear area
Shear area is increased and decreased by 50% from the actual and the behaviour is analysed
Fig 5: Moment redistribution v/s shear area
Fig 6: Maximum rotation capacity v/s shear area
From the graph, Moment Redistribution increases very much when shear area is varied 50% and rotation capacity of hinge reduced very much when shear area varied 50%
Fig 7: Hinge formation corresponds to shear area
From the figure, When actual shear area of beam is varied 50%, number of hinges increases.
C.Torsional modifier
Torsional modifier is increased and decreased by 50% from the actual and the plastic hinge region behaviour is analysed.
Fig 8: Moment redistribution v/s varying torsional modifier
Fig 9: Maximum rotation capacity v/s torsional modifier
From the graph, Moment Redistribution increases very much when torsional constant is varied 50% and rotation capacity of hinge reduced very much when torsional constant varied 50%.
Fig 10: Hinge formation corresponds to torsional modifier
From the figure, When torsional constant varied 50%, number of hinges increases slightly.
D.Shear reinforcement
Shear reinforcement is increased and decreased by 50% from the actual and the plastic hinge region behaviour is analysed.
Fig 11: Moment redistribution v/s shear reinforcement
Fig 12: Maximum rotation capacity v/s shear reinforcement
From the graph, very less percentage of shear reinforcement tends to more moment redistribution and rotation capacity.
Fig 13: Hinge formation corresponds to shear reinforcement
From the figure, Less shear reinforcement leads to more plastic hinges because it might not satisfy minimum shear reinforcement criteria.
E.Tension reinforcement
Tension reinforcement is increased and decreased by 50% by actual and the behaviour of plastic hinge region is analysed.
Fig 14: Moment redistribution v/s tension reinforcement
Fig 15: Maximum rotation capacity v/s tension reinforcement
From the graph, Moment redistribution decreases with increase in tension reinforcement and rotation capacity increases with increase in tension reinforcement.
Fig 16: Hinge formation corresponds to tension reinforcement
From the figure, For all percentage of tension reinforcement hinge formation is almost same.
F.Boundary condition
Plastic hinge region behaviour is analysed by the beam is considered as simply supported and fixed.
Fig 17: Moment redistribution v/s boundary condition
Fig 18: Maximum rotation capacity v/s boundary condition
From the graph, Moment redistribution is higher in case of simply supported beam and rotation capacity is less for simply supported beam.
Fig 19: Hinge formation corresponds to boundary condition
From the figure, The damage probability is slightly higher for fixed beams than simply supported beam.
G.Span to depth ratio
Span to depth ratio is varied from the actual and there by plastic hinge region behaviour is analysed.
Fig 20: Moment redistribution v/s span to depth ratio
Fig 21: Rotation capacity v/s span to depth ratio
From the graph, Span to depth ratio is directly proportional to moment redistribution and inversely proportional to rotation capacity.
Fig 22: Hinge formation corresponds span to depth ratio
From the figure, When L/D ratio increases hinge formation also increases.
H. Column size
Column size is varied from the actual and there by plastic hinge region behaviour is analysed.
Fig 23: Moment redistribution v/s column size
Fig 24: Maximum rotation capacity v/s column size
From the graph, Moment redistribution is less when stiffness ratio of beam and column becomes almost equal and rotation capacity depends on the distance from column to hinge location.
Fig 25: Hinge formation corresponds to column size
From the figure, Hinge formation is highest for larger columns, due to larger column to beam linear stiffness ratio.
Plotted moment redistribution and rotation capacity pushover curve by the values obtained from analysis on the various parameters for plastic hinge region behaviour of ductile flexural members.
Fig 26: Moment redistribution pushover curve
From the graph, Lower percentage of moment redistribution in beam leads to more stronger structure. Higher percentage of moment redistribution in beam leads to more ductile and economic structure. As per cl.37.1.1 of IS 456:2000,the maximum moment redistribution should be within 30%. So optimum percentage of moment redistribution lies in between 25% to 30%.
Fig 27: Rotation capacity pushover curve
From the figure, Rotation capacity around 100kNm leads to more stronger section.Corresponding moment redistribution around 100kNm rotation capacity is 25% to 37%.
Based on the values obtained from moment redistribution and rotation capacity pushover curve, yield capacity of the structure is analysed.
Fig 28: Yield capacity v/s moment redistribution
Fig 29: Yield capacity v/s rotation capacity
From the graph, Upper limit of force that can be applied without producing permanent deformation increases with decrease in moment redistribution.But lower percentage of moment redistribution leads to less ductile structure. Yield capacity is higher for structure with rotation capacity around 100kNm.
Based on the values obtained from moment redistribution and rotation capacity pushover curve, Ultimate capacity of the structure is analysed.
Fig 30: Ultimate capacity v/s moment redistribution
Fig 31: Ultimate capacity v/s rotation capacity
From the graph, Ultimate capacity should be higher to prevent necking of the members due to strains. Ultimate capacity is highest for moment redistribution 25% and Rotation capacity 100kNm.
Relationship of moment redistribution and rotation capacity of beam hinges on response of special moment resisting frame is analysed.
A.Base shear
Fig 31: Moment redistribution v/s base shear
Fig 32: Rotation capacity v/s base shear
From the graph, The ratio of moment redistribution to base shear is 0.0046. Base shear increases with increase in % moment redistribution. The ratio of rotation capacity to base shear is 0.0011. Base shear decreases with increase in rotation capacity.
B.Storey shear
Fig 33: Moment redistribution v/s storey shear
Fig 34: Rotation capacity v/s storey shear
From the graph, The ratio of moment redistribution to maximum story shear is 0.0197. Maximum story shear decreases with increase in % moment redistribution.The ratio of rotation capacity to story shear is 0.0011. Maximum storey shear decreases with increase in rotation capacity.
C.Storey drift
Fig 35: Moment redistribution v/s storey drift
Fig 36: Rotation capacity v/s storey drift
From the graph, The ratio of moment redistribution to inter story drift is 0.0058. Drift increases with increase in % moment redistribution.The ratio of rotation capacity to inter story drift is 0.0025. Drift decreases with increase in rotation capacity.
D.Storey stiffness
Fig 37: Moment redistribution v/s storey stiffness
Fig 38: Rotation capacity v/s storey stiffness
From the graph, The ratio of moment redistribution to maximum story stiffness is 0.009. Maximum story stiffness decreases with increase in % moment redistribution. Ratio of rotation capacity maximum story stiffness is 0.0029. Maximum story stiffness increases with increase in rotation capacity.
E. Fundamental time period
Fig 39: Moment redistribution v/s time period
Fig 39: Rotation capacity v/s time period
From the graph, The ratio of moment redistribution to time period is 0.0058. Time period increases with increase in % moment redistribution. The ratio of rotation capacity to time period is 0.0023. Time period decreases with increase in rotation capacity.


CONCLUSION
While doing performance based design following points should consider to limit the moment redistribution within 30%.

Shear area and torsional constant should not vary above 25%

Avoid simply supported beam as possible

Provide percentage tension reinforcement above 1.2

Span to Depth ratio should be within 12 including modification factor
Rotation Capacity of the hinges decrease with increase in Stiffness, Shear reinforcement and span to depth ratio of the beam. Column size does not cause much rise in moment redistribution. Percentage moment redistribution is proportional to Base shear, Story drift, Fundamental time period and ductility demand.Percentage moment redistribution is inversely proportional to story shear, story stiffness, yield capacity and ultimate capacity.Rotation capacity is proportional to story stiffness and inversely proportional to base shear, story shear, story drift and fundamental time period.
REFERENCES

R Prabhakara, B Nambiar, R Rakul, (2020) Analysis of rotation capacity of RC beams over formation of plastic hinges, Advances in structures, system and materials, 259266.

John A Reif, (2019) Plastic hinges and rotational capacity of ductile flexural members, Engineering structures, vol.200.

Ling Li, Wenzhong Zheng, Ying Wang, (2019) Review of moment redistribution in statically indeterminate RC members, Engineering structuresvol.196.

Abdel Hafid Nouali, (2018) Size effect on the plastic rotational capacity of RC element: Critical review of EC8, EJEC, vol24, issue 10.

M V Logesh, M P Suresh kumar, (2018) Plastic hinge zones of reinforced concrete structures, ISSN00765131, vol5, issue10.

Fang Yuan, YuFeiWab, (2017) Effect of load cycling on plastic hinges in nonlinear behaviour of RC buildings, Engineering structures, vol124.

Krishnanunni T.P, Gireesh C.G, (2016) A review on moment redistribution in continuous reinforced concrete beams, IJARET,vol.3, special issue 23.

Anres Lopez, Antonio Thomas, (2016) Influence of adjusted models of plastic hinges behaviour of RC buildings, Engineering structures, vol124.

Ricardo N F, D O Carmo and Sergio M R, (2014) Ductility and linear analysis with moment redistribution in reinforced high strength concrete beams, ASCEJ.

M S Marefat, Farzaniah, (2014) Evaluation of moment redistribution demand in continuous beam under gravity and seismic loads, WCEE,china.

Ahmed Sayed Tawfik, Ashraf Elzanaly, (2014) Behaviour and ductility of high strength RC frames, BBRC, vol10.

A Y T Lewng, XuMei Zhao, (2012) Analysis of plastic hinge regions in RC beams under monotonic loading, Engineering structures, vol 34.

Muhammed Matallah, Farooq K B, (2011) Evaluation of ductility &allowable moment redistribution in reinforced concrete structures, Canadian journal of civil engineering, 27(6):12861299.

James John, Vinayakan M S, (2011) Redistribution of negative moments in beams subjected to lateral load, JKCI, 23(6).