STM Journals Peer-reviewed research from Consortium e-Learning Network

Journal of Structural Engineering and Management Review Article

Structural Behavior of Flexible and Semi-Rigid Beam-Column Joint Connections by FEM

  1. Savant Gangadhar Sahebrao
  2. S.S.Kadam
  3. S.R.Patil

Abstract

This study investigates the structural behavior of flexible and semi-rigid beam-column joint connections in cold-formed steel (CFS) structures, focusing on the use of Finite Element Modeling (FEM) to simulate their performance under various loading conditions. Traditional analysis methods often oversimplify beam-column connections, treating them as either perfectly rigid or fully flexible, which does not accurately capture real-world joint behavior. In reality, many beam-column joints exhibit semi-rigid characteristics, where the stiffness lies between rigid and flexible extremes. This semi-rigid behavior significantly influences the stability, load distribution, and energy dissipation of structures, particularly under seismic and dynamic loading conditions. The study uses FEM to model both rigid and flexible bolted connections, analyzing load-carrying capacities, deformation, and rotational behavior under axial, shear, and bending forces. The geometric and material properties of CFS profiles are incorporated into the models, and the results are validated against existing codes, such as AISC 360 and IS 800:2007. The findings highlight the importance of accurately modeling semi-rigid joints to optimize material usage,improve structural safety, and enhance seismic resilience. This research provides valuable insights for refining design practices and advancing the performance of CFS structures, especially in earthquake-prone regions,

Keywords

References (79)

  1. A.-L. Zhang, Q. Wang, Z. Jiang, X.-F. Yang, and H. Zhang, ‘Experimental study of
  2. earthquake-resilient prefabricated steel beam-column joints with different
  3. connection forms’, Engineering Structures, vol. 187, pp. 299–313, May 2019, doi:
  4. 1016/j.engstruct.2019.02.071.
  5. H. Oliveira, F. Louf, E. Hervé‐Secourgeon, and F. Gatuingt, ‘Wall‐slab joint
  6. parameter identification of a reinforced concrete structure using possibly corrupted
  7. modal data’, Num Anal Meth Geomechanics, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 19–39, Jan. 2020,
  8. doi:10.1002/nag.2994.
  9. H. Rastogi, ‘Assessing Friction in Bolted Joints and its Implications on Steel
  10. Framed Structures’, 2024.
  11. T. Strouboulis, I. Babuška, and K. Copps, ‘The design and analysis of the
  12. Generalized Finite Element Method’, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and
  13. Engineering, vol. 181, no. 1–3, pp. 43–69, Jan. 2000, doi:10.1016/S0045-
  14. 7825(99)00072-9.
  15. A. Chitkeshwar, ‘Revolutionizing Structural Engineering: Applications of Machine
  16. Learning for Enhanced Performance and Safety’, Arch Computat Methods Eng, vol.
  17. 31, no. 8, pp. 4617–4632, Dec. 2024, doi:10.1007/s11831-024-10117-3.
  18. H. S. T. Al-Aasam, ‘SCHOOL OF MECHANICAL, AEROSPACE AND CIVIL
  19. ENGINEERING’, 2013.
  20. A. Ebanesar, H. Gladston, E. Noroozinejad Farsangi, and S. V. Sharma,
  21. ‘Strengthening of RC beam-column joints using steel plate with shear connectors:
  22. Experimental investigation’, Structures, vol. 35, pp. 1138–1150, Jan. 2022, doi:
  23. 1016/j.istruc.2021.08.042.
  24. A. B. Ribeiro, ‘MOMENT RESISTANT JOINTS FOR TIMBER FRAMES’, 2024.
  25. J. Miao, X. Du, C. Li, and B. Chen, ‘Load distribution and radial deformations for
  26. planetary roller screw mechanism with axial load, radial load and turning torque’,
  27. Mechanics Based Design of Structures and Machines, vol. 52, no. 4, pp.
  28. 1847–1873, Apr. 2024, doi:10.1080/15397734.2022.2162080.
  29. D. B. Hussein and A. B. Hussein, ‘Investigating the Factors Influencing the
  30. Strength of Cold-Formed Steel (CFS) Sections’, Buildings, vol. 14, no. 4, p. 1127,
  31. Apr. 2024, doi:10.3390/buildings14041127.
  32. M. Mehrkash and E. Santini-Bell, ‘Modal–based uncertainty quantification for
  33. deterministically estimated structural parameters in low-fidelity model updating of
  34. complex connections’, Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, vol. 77, p. 103671,
  35. Jul. 2024, doi:10.1016/j.probengmech.2024.103671.
  36. H. K. Celik and G. Sakar, ‘Semi-Rigid connections in steel structures: State-of-the-
  37. Art report on modelling, analysis and design’, Steel and Composite Structures, vol.
  38. 45, no. 1, pp. 1–21, Oct. 2022, doi:10.12989/SCS.2022.45.1.001.
  39. J. F. Hajjar, A. H. Sesen, E. Jampole, and A. Wetherbee, ‘A synopsis of sustainable
  40. structural systems with rocking, self-centering, and articulated energy-dissipating
  41. fuses’, 2013.
  42. O. C. Assogba, Y. Tan, X. Zhou, C. Zhang, and J. N. Anato, ‘Numerical
  43. investigation of the mechanical response of semi-rigid base asphalt pavement under
  44. traffic load and nonlinear temperature gradient effect’, Construction and Building
  45. Materials, vol. 235, p. 117406, Feb. 2020, doi:
  46. 1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117406.
  47. H. Zhang, ‘Connection investigations for cold-formed steel modular building
  48. structure systems’, 2017.
  49. S. Jeyarajan and J. Y. Richard Liew, ‘Robustness analysis of 3D Composite
  50. buildings with semi-rigid joints and floor slab’, Structures, vol. 6, pp. 20–29, May
  51. 2016, doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2016.01.005.
  52. M. S. Maseer and A. J. Abdulridha, ‘Enhancing performance of beam-column joints
  53. in reinforced concrete structures using carbon fiber-reinforced polymers (CFRP): A
  54. novel review’, Hybrid Advances, vol. 10, p. 100444, Sep. 2025, doi:
  55. 1016/j.hybadv.2025.100444.
  56. V.-H. Truong, P.-C. Nguyen, and S.-E. Kim, ‘An efficient method for optimizing
  57. space steel frames with semi-rigid joints using practical advanced analysis and the
  58. micro-genetic algorithm’, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 128, pp.
  59. 416–427, Jan. 2017, doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.09.013.
  60. S. M. Mojtabaei, J. Becque, and I. Hajirasouliha, ‘Behavior and Design of Cold-
  61. Formed Steel Bolted Connections Subjected to Combined Actions’, J. Struct. Eng.,
  62. vol. 147, no. 4, p. 04021013, Apr. 2021, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-
  63. 541X.0002966.
  64. N. M. B. Mohsan, ‘STRUCTURAL BEHAVIOUR OF CONCRETE FILLED
  65. COLD-FORMED STEEL CHANNEL WALL PANEL UNDER AXIAL
  66. LOADING’, 2020.
  67. M. A. Shaheen, A. S. J. Foster, and L. S. Cunningham, ‘A novel device to improve
  68. robustness of end plate beam-column connections’, Structures, vol. 28, pp.
  69. 2415–2423, Dec. 2020, doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2020.10.055.
  70. D. Palermo and F. J. Vecchio, ‘Simulation of Cyclically Loaded Concrete
  71. Structures Based on the Finite-Element Method’, J. Struct. Eng., vol. 133, no. 5, pp.
  72. 728–738, May 2007, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:5(728).
  73. F. Amsyar, C. S. Tan, A. Sulaiman, and S. Mohammad, ‘Semi-rigid Composite
  74. Beam-to-column Joints for Cold-formed Steel Frames: Experimental and Numerical
  75. Study’, Int J Steel Struct, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 974–992, Aug. 2023, doi:
  76. 1007/s13296-023-00744-0.
  77. K. Bzdawka, ‘Tampereen teknillinen yliopisto’, 2012.
  78. M. Soori, ‘Artificial Intelligent in Optimization of Steel Moment Frame Structures
  79. A Review’, vol. 18, no. 3, 2024.
Support