Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Experimental and numerical analysis of RC structure with two leaf cavity wall subjected to shake table

  • Onat, Onur (Department of Civil Engineering, Tunceli University) ;
  • Lourenco, Paulo B. (Department of Civil Engineering, Minho University) ;
  • Kocak, Ali (Department of Civil Engineering, Yildiz Technical University)
  • Received : 2015.04.15
  • Accepted : 2015.08.04
  • Published : 2015.09.10
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper presents finite element (FE) based pushover analysis of a reinforced concrete structure with a two-leaf cavity wall (TLCW) to estimate the performance level of this structure. In addition to this, an unreinforced masonry (URM) model was selected for comparison. Simulations and analyses of these structures were performed using the DIANA FE program. The mentioned structures were selected as two storeys and two bays. The dimensions of the structures were scaled 1:1.5 according to the Cauchy Froude similitude law. A shake table experiment was implemented on the reinforced concrete structure with the two-leaf cavity wall (TLCW) at the National Civil Engineering Laboratory (LNEC) in Lisbon, Portugal. The model that simulates URM was not experimentally studied. This structure was modelled in the same manner as the TLCW. The purpose of this virtual model is to compare the respective performances. Two nonlinear analyses were performed and compared with the experimental test results. These analyses were carried out in two phases. The research addresses first the analysis of a structure with only reinforced concrete elements, and secondly the analysis of the same structure with reinforced concrete elements and infill walls. Both researches consider static loading and pushover analysis. The experimental pushover curve was plotted by the envelope of the experimental curve obtained on the basis of the shake table records. Crack patterns, failure modes and performance curves were plotted for both models. Finally, results were evaluated on the basis of the current regulation ASCE/SEI 41-06.

Keywords

References

  1. ASCE SEI 41/06, (2007), Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Building: ASCE SEI 41/06, American Society of Civil Engineers, USA.
  2. Barros, R.C. and Almeida, R. (2005), "Pushover analysis of asymmetric three-dimensional building frames", J. Civil Eng. Manag., 11(1), 3-12.
  3. Bayraktar, A., Coskun, N. and Yalcin, A. (2007), "Damages of masonry buildings during the July 2, 2004 Dogubayazit (Agn) earthquake in Turkey", Eng. Fail. Anal., 14, 147-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2005.11.011
  4. Bruneau, M. (2002), "Building damage from the Marmara, Turkey earthquake of August 17, 1999", J. Seismol., 6, 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020035425531
  5. CEB-FIP Model Code 2010 (2012), CEB-FIP Model Code 2010 - Final draft, vol. 1., Comite EuroInternational du Beton.
  6. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (2001), "A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31, 561-582.
  7. Dogangun, A. (2004), "Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the May 1, 2003 Bingol earthquake in Turkey", Eng. Struct., 26, 841-856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.02.005
  8. Dolsek, M. and Fajfar, P. (2005), "Simplified non-linear seismic analysis of infilled reinforced concrete frames", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 34, 49-66. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.411
  9. Eurocode 2 (2004), Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings, EN1992-1-1, Brussel.
  10. Fajfar, P. (1999), "Capacity spectrum method based on inelastic demand spectra", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 28, 979-993. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199909)28:9<979::AID-EQE850>3.0.CO;2-1
  11. Ghobarah, A. (2001), "Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: state of development", Eng. Struct., 23, 878-884. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00036-0
  12. Kizilkanat, A., Cosar, A., Kocak, A., Guney, D., Selcuk, M.E. and Yildinm, M. (2011), 23 October 2011 Van Earthquake Technical Investigation Report, Yildiz Technical University Press.
  13. Kilar, V. and Fajfar, P. (1997), "Simple push-over analysis of asymmetric buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 233-249. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199702)26:2<233::AID-EQE641>3.0.CO;2-A
  14. Krawinkler, H. and Seneviranta, G.D.P.K. (1998), "Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation", Eng. Struct., 20, 452-464. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00092-8
  15. Leite, J. (2014), "Design of masonry walls for building enclosures subjected to extreme actions", PhD Dissertation, Minho University, Portugal.
  16. Lourenco, P.B. and Rots, J.G. (1997), "A multi-surface interface model for the analysis of masonry structures", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 123(7), 660-668. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1997)123:5(660)
  17. Lourenco, P.B. (2009), "Recent advances in masonry structures: Micromodelling and homogenization, in multiscale modeling in solid mechanics: Computational approaches", Eds. U. Galvanetto, M.H. Ferri Aliabadi, Imperial College Press, 251-294.
  18. Lourenco, P.B., Rots, J.G. and Blaauwendraad, J. (1998), "Continuum model for masonry: parameter estimation and validation", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 124(6), 642-652. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:6(642)
  19. Lourenco P B, (1996), "Computational strategies for masonry structures", PhD Thesis, Delft, Netherland.
  20. Ministry of Construction (2007), Turkey Earthquake Disaster Prevention 2007, Ankara.
  21. Moghadam, A.S. and Tso, W. (2000), "Pushover analysis for asymmetric and set-back multi-story buildings", 12th WCEE, 1093-1101.
  22. Pereira, M.F.P. (2013), "Avaliagao do desempenho das envolventes dos edificios face a acgao dos sismos", PhD Dissertation, University of Minho, Portugal.
  23. Reinhorn, A.M. (1997), "Inelastic analysis techniques in seismic evaluations", Proceedings of International Workshop on Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes, Slovenia.
  24. Salonikios, T., Karakostas, C., Lekidis, V and Anthoine, A. (2003), "Comparative inelastic pushover analysis of masonry frames", Eng. Struct., 25, 1515-1523. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(03)00118-4
  25. Sayin, E., Yon, B., Calayir, Y. and Karaton, M. (2013), "Failures of masonry and adobe buildings during the June 23, 2011 Maden-(Elazig) earthquake in Turkey", Eng. Fail. Anal., 342007 779-791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2012.10.016
  26. Sayin, E., Yon, B., Calayir, Y. and Gor, M., (2014), "Construction failures of masonry and adobe buildings during the 2011 Van earthquakes in Turkey", Struct. Eng. Mech., 51(3), 503-518. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2014.51.3.503
  27. Selby, R.G. and Vecchio, F.J. (1993), "Three-dimensional constitutive relations for reinforced concrete", Technical Report 93-02, University of Toronto, Department of Civil Engineering, Toronto, Canada.
  28. Structural masonry (1997), An experimental/numerical basis for practical design rules, CUR Report 171, CRC Press, January. (in Dutch)
  29. Tapan, M., Comert, M., Demir, C., Sayan, Y., Orakcal, K. and Ilki, A. (2013), "Failures of structures during the October 23, 2011 Tabanli (Van) and November 9, 2011 Edremit (Van) earthquakes in Turkey", Eng. Fail. Anal., 34, 606-628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.02.013
  30. Tso, W.K. and Moghadan, A.S. (1996), "Damage assessment of eccentric multistorey buildings using 3-D pushover analysis", 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 997-1005.
  31. TNO (2012), "Displacement method Analyser, User's Manual", Release 9.4.4, Netherlands.
  32. Vecchio, F.J. and Collins, M.P. (1986), "The modified compression field theory for reinforced concrete elements subjected to shear", ACI J., 83(22), 219-231.
  33. Yon, B., Sayin, E. and Koksal, T. S., (2013), "Seismic response of the buildings during the May 19, 2011 Simav, Turkey earthquake" Earthq. Struct., 5(3), 343-357. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2013.5.3.343
  34. Yon, B. and Calayir, Y. (2014), "Effects of confinement reinforcement and concrete strength on nonlinear behavior of RC buildings", Comput. Concrete, 14(3), 279-297. https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2014.14.3.279
  35. Zijl, V.G.P.A.G. (2000), "Computational modeling of masonry creep and shrinkage", PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Nederland.

Cited by

  1. Nonlinear analysis of RC structure with massive infill wall exposed to shake table vol.10, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.4.811
  2. An artificial neural network-based earthquake casualty estimation model for Istanbul city vol.84, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2541-4
  3. Assessment of the combined in-plane and out-of-plane behavior of brick infill walls within reinforced concrete frames under seismic loading vol.47, pp.14, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3111
  4. Assessment of nonlinear static and incremental dynamic analyses for RC structures vol.18, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2016.18.6.1195
  5. Shear stress indicator to predict seismic performance of residential RC buildings vol.19, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2017.19.3.283
  6. Application of Artificial Neural Networks to the prediction of out-of-plane response of infill walls subjected to shake table vol.21, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2018.21.4.521
  7. Experimental damage evaluation of prototype infill wall based on forced vibration test vol.8, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/acc.2019.8.2.077
  8. Experimental Campaign of a Low-Cost and Replaceable System for Passive Energy Dissipation in Precast Concrete Structures vol.10, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/app10041213
  9. Parametric nonlinear static analysis of a RC structure with TLCW exposed to bidirectional earthquake load by using different modelling methodologies vol.44, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103395