Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

A set of tests on 17 large-scale, nominally identical, beam specimens with variations in loading protocol, loading rate, and restraint to axial elongation are described. Three specimens were also repaired by epoxy injection following an initial damaging earthquake loading. This paper provides a detailed description of the test program, and the corresponding data are made available at Design-Safe (DOI: 10.17603/DS2SQ2K). While the primary goal of the test program was to improve the state of knowledge regarding the post-earthquake residual capacity of reinforced concrete plastic hinges in beams, the data are useful for modeling approaches that consider loading rate, plastic hinge elongation, cyclic degradation, and flexure–shear–axial interaction, in addition to investigating the effectiveness of post-earthquake repair techniques by epoxy injection of cracks.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2011. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, ACI 318-11, Farmington Hills, MI.

American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2013. Guide for Testing Reinforced Concrete Structural Elements Under Slowly Applied Simulated Seismic Loads, ACI 374.2 R13, Farmington Hills, MI.

Applied Technology Council, 1998. Evaluation of Earthquake Damaged Concrete and Masonry Wall Buildings, FEMA 306: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.

Australian/New Zealand Standard (AS/NZS), 2001. Steel Reinforcing Materials, AS/NZS 4671:2001, Sydney, Australia.

Bull

D. K.

and Brunsdon

2008. Examples of Concrete Structural Design to New Zealand Standard 3101, Cement & Concrete Association of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand.

Canadian Standards Association (CSA), 2004. Design of Concrete Structures, CSA A23.3-04, Mississauga, Canada.

Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission, 2012. Final Report Volume 2: The Performance of Christchurch CBD Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.

Celebi

and Penzien

1973. Hysteretic Behavior of Epoxy-Repaired Reinforced Concrete Beams, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.

Chandramohan

Baker

J. W.

and Deierlein

G. G.

2016. Quantifying the influence of ground motion duration on structural collapse capacity using spectrally equivalent records, Earthquake Spectra 32(2), 927–950.

10.

Chiou

Darragh

Gregor

and Silva

2008. NGA project strong-motion database, Earthquake Spectra 24(1), 23–44.

11.

Elwood

K. J.

Marder

Pampanin

Cuevas Ramirez

Smith

Cattanach

Kral

and Stannard

2016. Draft framework for assessing residual capacity of earthquake-damaged concrete buildings, Paper presented at the New Zealand Society of Earthquake Engineering Conference, Christchurch, New Zealand, 1–3 April 2016, Paper Number O–12.

12.

Encina

and Henry

R. S.

2016. Axial elongation in ductile reinforced concrete walls, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 49(4), 305–318.

13.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2009. Effects of Strength and Stiffness Degradation on Seismic Response, FEMA P440A, Washington, D.C.

14.

Fenwick

R. C.

and Fong

1979. The behaviour of reinforced concrete Beams under cyclic loading, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 12(3), 158–167.

15.

Fenwick

R. C.

and Megget

L. M.

1993. Elongation and load deflection characteristics of reinforced concrete members containing plastic hinges, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 26(1), 28–41.

16.

French

C. W.

Thorp

G. A.

and Tsai

W. J.

1990. Epoxy repair techniques for moderate earthquake damage, Structural Journal 87(4), 416–424.

17.

Henry

R. S.

Dizhur

Elwood

K. J.

Hare

and Brunsdon

2017. Damage to concrete buildings with precast floors during the 2016 Kaikoura earthquake, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 50(2), 174–186.

18.

Ibarra

L. F.

Medina

R. A.

and Krawinkler

2005. Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 34(12), 1489–1511.

19.

Kam

W. Y.

Pampanin

and Elwood

2011. Seismic performance of reinforced concrete buildings in the 22 February Christchurch (Lyttleton) earthquake, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 44(4), 239–278.

20.

Kim

Stanton

and MacRae

2004. Effect of beam growth on reinforced concrete frames, Journal of Structural Engineering 130(9), 1333–1342.

21.

Henry

R. S.

Gultom

and Ma

Q. T.

2017. Cyclic testing of reinforced concrete walls with distributed minimum vertical reinforcement, Journal of Structural Engineering 143(5).

22.

Marder

and Elwood

2017. Testing of seventeen identical ductile reinforced concrete beams with various loading protocols and boundary conditions, DesignSafe-CI, Dataset, doi:10.17603/DS2SQ2K.

23.

Park

1989. Evaluation of ductility of structures and structural assemblages from laboratory testing, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 22(3), 155–166.

24.

Peng

B. H.

Dhakal

R. P.

Fenwick

R. C.

Carr

A. J.

and Bull

D. K.

2013. Multispring hinge element for reinforced concrete frame analysis, Journal of Structural Engineering 139(4), 595–606.

25.

Shahi

S. K.

and Baker

J. W.

2011. An empirically calibrated framework for including the effects of near-fault directivity in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 101(2), 742–755.

26.

Standards New Zealand, 1986. Methods of Test for Concrete, NZS 3112.2:1986, Wellington, New Zealand.

27.

Standards New Zealand, 2004. Structural Design Actions Part 5: Earthquake Actions - New Zealand, NZS 1170.5:2004, Wellington, New Zealand.

28.

Standards New Zealand, 2006. Concrete Structures Standard, NZS 3101:2006, Wellington, New Zealand.

29.

Visnjic

Panagiotou

and Moehle

J. P.

2015. Seismic response of 20-story-tall reinforced concrete special moment-resisting frames designed with current code provisions, Earthquake Spectra 31(2), 869–893.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.24 MB

0.19 MB

0.00 MB

Testing of 17 Identical Ductile Reinforced Concrete Beams with Various Loading Protocols and Boundary Conditions

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material