Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

14 vues

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Anchor Bolts - Concrete Capacity Design.pdf
- U.K.Singh_Manufacturing_Processes
- A Parametric Study on Fatigue Strength of Spot Weld Joints
- Fire Resistance Design
- Elastic Properties of RCC under Flexural Loading
- wangzhiliang109612-201008-13[1]
- BTH-1-2008
- Tensile Test
- ACI_Sezen_Setzler_2008-Reinforcement Slip in Reinforced Concrete Columns
- Lifting Lug
- 0910SEM1-ME4254
- Sagaseta09b
- DESIGN OF BEARING PAD
- Equation Sheet S17 (1)
- Chapter+1+spring+3013
- Basic Bone Science Module
- 1-s2.0-S1877705815045518-main
- 1-s2.0-S0020768305000624-main
- Lecture
- 12594941_Main.pdf

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 10

Toshinori Kabeyasawa

Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Japan

Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Japan

Shun'ichi Igarashi

Structural Quality Assurance, Inc., Japan

ABSTRACT:

Six wall specimens were tested to investigate effects of boundary columns, openings,

reinforcement details and sheet strengthening on seismic performance. The shear strength

of a wall without boundary columns was slightly less although it may be regarded

basically as equivalent to the wall with boundary columns. The strength reduction of the

wall with two openings could be estimated by applying conventional formula for an

opening. Although the strength was reduced, the deformability of the wall with opening

was much higher than that of the wall without openings. The effectiveness of polyester

sheet on strength and deformability in strengthening reinforced concrete walls were

verified through the test in both cases with and without openings. The confinement of the

boundary columns with the sheet was effective to increase the deformability and the axial

load carrying capacity after shear failure. The measured increase or decrease in shear

strengths due to these effects could roughly be approximated with conventional design

equations, although further experimental and analytical investigations are needed for

general evaluation method, especially on deformability.

1 INTRODUCTION

A series of wall tests were carried out as preliminary tests of a comprehensive research project on

seismic design method of reinforced concrete buildings consisting of members with irregular sectional

shapes. The purpose of the project is to establish an evaluation method of strength and deformability

of reinforced concrete members, especially such as a wall with openings, a wall without boundary

columns and a column with wing wall(s), to verify the effect of detailing and strengthening on

deformability and ultimate axial capacity, and to evaluate seismic performance of reinforced concrete

buildings consisting of such members, by experimental and analytical verification.

Observing post-earthquake damages to reinforced concrete buildings, especially designed before 1981

in Japan, the shear failure of the short columns due to spandrel walls has been one of the typical non-

ductile failure modes of members, which often leads the buildings to structural collapse in axial

failure. Therefore, the current Japanese code of practice basically requires higher lateral load-carrying

capacity of the structure if such members are included, while in practice the use of seismic slit has

been a typical solution, isolating the spandrel walls from the columns. Following the practice, the wing

walls have also been isolated from the columns, although the wing walls designed integral with the

columns would be effective to the seismic capacity of the whole structure, especially in strength

dominant cases, as in most cases of low-rise buildings. The wall panel has also been isolated in such

case as a wall with large-size opening, which cannot be regarded as the shear wall in the current code

of practice. The practice is due to lack of reliable evaluation method formula.

On the other hand, we have developed and verified the effectiveness and efficiency of using polyester

sheet, called SRF, for the strengthening of old non-ductile members, not only columns but also walls

as well(Kabeyasawa et al, 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2005), especially against the axial collapse after

flexural and shear failure. The strengthening method was verified to be effective also to the shear

strength and the deformability of the reinforced concrete walls with boundary columns and the

concrete block infilled walls, owing to the effective detail of confining the boundary columns.

In this paper, the test results of six wall specimens were reported, which was recently carried to verify

with multi-purpose: The first two specimens were walls with and without boundary columns. Another

two was the walls with openings, one with conventional and one with ductile details. The other two

was the walls strengthened with polyester sheet. The effects of these design parameters on the strength

and the deformability were investigated experimentally.

2 TEST SPECIMENS

Tested were six reinforced concrete wall specimens as listed in Table 1. The scale of the specimens,

with the span length of 1800mm and the inner height of 1400mm, to typical sections of full-scale low-

rise building in Japan may be one-third to two-fifth. The six specimens were named as (1)CW, (2)IW,

(3)OW, (4)OWF, (5)IW-SRF, and (6)OW-SRF.

The section and reinforcement details of the specimen "CW" and the specimen "IW" are shown in

Figure 1(a) and (b). The specimen "CW" is a wall with boundary columns with typical conventional or

current design practice for low-rise walls. The section of the boundary columns is 250mmx250mm,

with the main bars of 16-D10 and the hoops of 2-D4 at the spacing of 40mm. The thickness of the wall

panel is 80mm with the shear reinforcement of 2-D4 at the spacing of 130mm, the ratio of 0.0025,

which corresponds to the minimum requirement in Japan.

The specimen "IW" is a wall without boundary columns, which is not typical in Japan, because the

Building Standard Law(BSL) requires that the shear wall shall be confined with boundary columns.

Therefore the tests of the walls without the boundary columns have been relatively few so that the

evaluation method has not yet verified enough. The wall thickness was 120mm, which corresponds to

the equivalent thickness to the specimen "CW" with the same sectional area including the boundary

columns. The wall end region was defined as 450mm, which is one-forth of the total wall length, and

the region was confined with the same spacing of as the hoops of the boundary columns in the

specimen "CW," so that the ratio is to be about twice 0.0052. By placing two sub-ties within the

confined region so that the hoop ratio to the orthogonal direction was made higher than the minimum

requirement of 0.002.

Figure 1 Details of reinforced concrete specimens

2

2.2 Wall specimens with openings

The section and reinforcement details of the specimen "OW" and the specimen "OWF" are shown in

Figure 2(a) and (b). The specimen "OW" is a wall where two openings are placed in the wall panels of

the specimen "CW." The width and the height of each opening is 360mmx680mm. The size of these

openings corresponds to the upper limit in Japanese code of practice, in which case the may be

regarded as the shear wall, otherwise the wall shall be modelled as a frame with two columns and the

wing walls. The strength reduction factor to the non-opening wall is calculated as 0.6 in accordance

with AIJ standard. The reinforcing bars of 2-D6 were placed at the peripheral of the openings also in

accordance with the calculation procedure of AIJ standard. The reinforcement details were typical in

Japanese practice. The specimen "OWF" is a wall with special reinforcement details, by which it was

aimed that the strength and the deformability and the axial capacity of the wall with openings are to be

made much higher that the conventional walls. In the part of the wall panel as the wing wall to the

boundary columns, the lateral web reinforcement are densely placed at the same spacing of 40mm as

the column hoops.

2344

534 6 44 6 44 534

!! 878

01! :8<

!! 878

/! 8

1 " :; 9

Figure 1 Details of specimens

!0 :8<

1

!! 878

%'&)(*& +), & +),-& +),.%'&)( 234 253 5=4 5=4 5=4 253 234

!#$ !#$ 8

>?

/!

(a) Specimen OW (b) Specimen OWF c

Figure 2 Details of specimens with openings

OW-SRF

d

2.3 Wall specimens strengthened using sheet

3

The section and reinforcement details of the specimen "IW-SRF" and the specimen "OW-SRF" are the

same as those of the specimen "IW" and the specimen "OW" shown in Figure 1(b) and Figure 2(a).

These two specimens were strengthened after construction using polyester sheet "SRF." The details of

sheet rapping and anchorage are shown in Figure 3. The specimen IW-SRF is to simulate a seismic

strengthening in case that only one side is available for the sheet in an existing wall. The other side is

to anchor the end with the length of 450mm. The sheet was pasted only using the adhesive bond,

which has already in practical use. The sheet details for the specimen OW-SRF basically follow the

standard method, which has already been developed and verified for a non-opening specimen

(Kabeyasawa, 2005), where the L-shaped steel bar and the high strength bolts are used for the

anchorage of the sheet at the inner corners of the wall-panel edge and the column face. The sheet was

fastened with the bars (M10@190) and the bolts post-tensioned through the wall panel, as shown in

Figure 3(b), to prevent tensile stripping of the sheet at the inner corner and also to confine the

boundary columns effectively.

The nominal strength of concrete is 24MPa. Material properties of concrete and steel were to be

basically common to the six specimens, although the concrete strength measured at each test date are

little different as listed in Table 2(a) and (b). However, the concrete strength at the time of testing RC-

M was a little higher than the nominal, while almost equal to when SRF-A and SRF-X were tested.

The properties of SRF sheet are shown in Table 2(c).

3

360 680 360

L-shaped

steel bar

50 @ 50 @ 4

High strength

630 790 630 430 1190 430 bolts

M10@190

3

Figure 3 Details of specimens strengthened with sheet

specimen column wall

Name Section Main bars Hoop dimension Web reinforcement

CW 250×250 16-D10(1.82%) D4@40(0.25%) 80 D4@130double(0.25%)

IW,IW-SRF 120×450 16-D10(1.82%) D4@40(0.52%) 120 D4@130double(0.16%)

OW,OW-SRF 250×250 16-D10(1.82%) D4@40(0.25%) 80 D4@130double(0.25%)

OWF 250×250 16-D10(1.82%) D4@40(0.25%) 80 D4@65double(0.5%),

D4@40double(0.80%)

(a) concrete (b) steel

Name Elastic Measured Strain Mark Nominal Yield Maximum

Young Modulus Strength at strength Strength Strength Strength

(N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2)

CW 2.47 22.4 0.00159 D4 SD295 374 524.8

IW,IW-SRF 2.5 24.36 0.00172 D6 SD295 334.5 485.2

OW,OW-SRF 2.49 24.38 0.00168 D10 SD295 397.8 515.2

OWF 2.49 24.38 0.00168

Table 3 Material properties of

(C)sheet polyester sheet

Name Thickness Width Elastic Yield Measured Measured

(mm) (mm) Young Modulus Strength Strength Elongation

(N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm) Strain

SRF-2100 2.8 100.8 6.01 A 103 114.4 457.5 0.12

capacity : }1000kN

pantograph

stroke : }200mm

beam

reaction

3.1 Loading system column

load cell

of ERI, University of Tokyo, as shown in

Figure 4, was used for the test. An oil jack base

in the vertical direction were controlled to

apply constant vertical load and lateral Figure 4 Loading system

4

shear with constant moment-to-shear ratio. The total constant axial load N for the two columns was

600kN which corresponded to the axial load ratio of 0.2 to the area of the boundary columns 2Ac,

namely as N/(2Acfc)=0.2, where the nominal compressive concrete fc=24MPa is used. The lateral

shear is applied with the lateral jack through the steel beam attached above the top beam of the

specimen. The bending moment is applied by the two jacks in proportion to the lateral shear so that at

the moment-to-shear ratio at the wall base is kept constant as M/Qlw=0.75, where lw is the effective

wall depth, lw=1800mm. The moment-to-shear ratio of 0.75 is selected based on the preliminary

calculation aiming that the shear failure would occur prior to flexural yielding even for the

strengthened specimens and the shear strength could be identified. The three jacks have the loading

capacity of 1000kN in tensile and compressive and 400mm stroke with the universal joint clevises at

the two ends and the load cell. The lateral load was reversed at the peak deformation angles of B

1/400, B 1/300, B 1/200, B 1/150, B 1/100, B 1/75, B 1/50, B 1/37.5, B 1/25, each with one cycle of

loading, until an brittle failure would occur.

An overall deformation was measured by displacement meters such as lateral deformation at the top

beam and axial deformations of boundary columns. Local deformations were measured by dividing the

wall into four segments along the wall height and lateral displacements and axial deformations at both

boundary columns were measured. The distortions of openings were also measured. Strains in the

column main bars, the hoops, and the web reinforcement in the wall panel were also measured by wire

strain gauges mainly at expected diagonal failure lines or the base critical sections. For the sheet

strengthened specimen, the strains in the sheet were measured at more than 100 points so that the

effect of the sheet on the shear resistance mechanism could be identified quantitatively. The maximum

widths of typical cracks at the peak deformations of each loading cycle as well as the residual crack

widths at the unloading points of the lateral load were measured using crack scale.

4 TEST RESULTS

Failure process of each specimen is described briefly below referring to the peak deformation angles

of the loading cycle. Hysteretic relations between the lateral shear force and the lateral deformation are

shown in Figure 5 with the photos showing final failure modes at the end of testing. 6

(a) The specimens "CW": Shear cracks occurred and progressed from the corner base in the loading . Photos at the end of testing

are shown in Figure 7.

cycles of [ B 1/400rad] and [ B 1/300rad]. Crushing occurred in the loading cycles of [ B 1/200rad].

After the cyclic loading and in the way to the next peak deformation[+1/150], diagonal shear tension

failure occurred at 7.9mm, slightly over 1/200rad. The constant axial load could not be sustained

although large axial compressive deformation was occurred.

(b) The specimens "IW": Shear cracks occurred and progressed from the corner base in the loading

cycles of [ B 1/400rad] and [ B 1/300rad]. Diagonal tension shear failure occurred in the way to

negative peak of -1/200 at -6.2mm, slightly ahead of reaching -1/200rad. The constant axial load could

not be sustained after the shear failure due to out-of-plane buckling.

(c) The specimens "OW": Shear cracks occurred and progressed from the corner at the opening in

the loading cycles of [ B 1/400rad] and [ B 1/300rad]. The maximum shear strengths were attained at

[ B 1/100rad] when the crushing of concrete was started. Shear failure across the boundary column

occurred in the way to negative peak of -1/37.5 at -22.15mm, ahead of reaching -1/37.5rad. The

constant axial load could not be sustained after the shear failure.

(d) The specimens "OWF": Shear cracks occurred and progressed from the corner at the opening in

the loading cycles of [ B 1/400rad] and [ B 1/300rad]. The maximum shear strengths were attained at

[ B 1/100rad]. Crushing of concrete was observed and progressed at [ B 1/75rad] and [ B 1/50rad],

5

although stable behavior was observed. The constant axial load could be sustained stably after the

crushing failure until the end of testing when the lateral deformation reached the limit of

measurement[120mm].

(e) The specimens "IW-SRF": Shear cracks occurred and progressed in [ B 1/400rad] and [ B

1/300rad], although the widths were relatively restrained than those of the specimen IW. The

maximum shear strengths were attained at [ B 1/150rad]. Shear failure occurred at the wall base in the

way to [ B 1/100rad] at -10.75mm. The constant axial load could not be sustained after the shear

failure due to out-of-plane buckling.

(f) The specimens "OW-SRF": Shear cracks occurred and progressed from the corner at the opening

in the loading cycles of [ B 1/400rad] and [ B 1/300rad]. The maximum shear strengths were attained at

[ B 1/100rad]. Crushing of concrete at the opening corner was observed and progressed at [ B

1/37.5rad] and [ B 1/25rad]. The constant axial load could be sustained stably after the crushing failure

until the end of testing when the lateral deformation reached the limit of measurement[120mm].

DGFHFIF

JLFIF 822kN

MLFIF ,6.72mm

Shear force(kN)

NHFIF

PLFIF

F

CKPLFIF

CONHFIF

CKMLFIF

CKJLFIF -791kN,-6.54mm

CEDGFHFIF

CKMLFQCINIF-CKPHFRFSPLFRNIFTMLF

Displacement(mm)

(a) Specimen CW

VGWHWIW

XLWIW 753kN,7.01mm

Shear force(kN)

YLWIW

ZHWIW

[LWIW

W

UK[LWIW

UOZHWIW

UKYLWIW

UKXLWIW -759kN,-

UEVGWHWIW 6.22mm

UKYLWQUOZHW\UK[LWTWS[LW]ZIWTYLW

(b) Specimen IW

_G`H`I`

aL`I` 486kN,13.75mm

bL`I`

Shear force(kN)

cH`I`

dL`I`

`

^KdL`I`

^OcH`I`

^KbL`I`

^KaL`I`

-472kN,-

^E_G`H`I` 13.75mm

^KbL`\^OcH`Q^OdH`e` dL`]cH`TbH`

Displacement(mm)

(c) Specimen OW 6

Figure 5 Hysteresis relations and photo at failure

6

gGhHhIh

iLhIh 566kN,13.57mm

jLhIh

Shear force(kN)

kHhIh

lLhIh

h

fKlLhIh

fOkHhIh

fKjLhIh

fKiLhIh -591.5kN,-

fEgGhHhIh 14.02mm

fKjLhmfOkHhmfKlLhnholLhpkHhqjLhqiLhrgshIhtgGlHhtgskIh

(d) Specimen OWF

GHI

LI

LI 805kN,7.02mm

Shear force(kN)

HI

LI

KLI

OHI

K
LI

KLI -934kN,9.2mm

EGHI

K
H\IIQOH]SL]IT
L

Displacement(mm)

(e) Specimen IW-SRF

vGwHwIw

xLwIw 529kN,14.02mm

yLwIw

Shear force(kN)

zHwIw

{LwIw

w

uK{LwIw

uOzHwIw

uKyLwIw

uKxLwIw -535kN,-14.03mm

uEvGwHwIw

uKyHw|uOzHw}uK{Lw~wo{HwnzHwqyLwqxLwvGwHwvG{HwtvszIw

Displacement(mm)

(f) Specimen OW-SRF

6

Figure 5 Hysteresis relations and photo at failure

The maximum crack widths at each peak deformation angle and the residual crack widths at the

unloading point of each cycle are shown in Figure 6. The maximum and residual cracks are restrained listed

in the specimens with sheet (SRF), especially at larger deformation angles. The residual crack widths Table

are approximately by one-half than the maximum at peak. f

Strains measured on the polyester sheet at the maximum shear strength in positive and negative 4

directions were summarized in Figure 7: 0.36% for IW-SRF, 0.6% for OW-SRF. The tensile stresses

in the sheet corresponding to the maximum strains estimated from these strains and elastic stiffness

also shown with different scale abscissa axis in the figure. The effects of the sheet on the strength are 7

discussed in detail with design calculation in the next chapter.

7

Max clack width(mm)

¡

Is ¡ I¢£¤G¥

G

O I

Displacement(mm) Displacement(mm)

(a) Specimens CW,IW,IW-SRF

¯±° « ¨ ¾±¿ º ·

¯±°³² ¾ ¿³À

±

Max crack width(mm)

¯±°I´µ¶s² ª © ¾±¿IÁÂÃGÀ ¹ ¸

ªs¨ ¹s·

© ¸

l

¨ · l

¬O ¨ ¬O® ¨ ¬ « ¨ ¨ « ¨ ® ¨ ¨ » ¼ ·

O » ½ ·

O » º · · º · ½ · ¼ ·

Displacement(mm)

¦ Displacement(mm)

b § Specimens OW,OWF,OW-SRF

Figure 6 Maximam clack widths at each cycle of loading 7

Observed maximum strengths are compared with the calculated strengths based on design equations in

Japan (BCJ, 2000) as below. The material properties from the test are used for the calculation. The 5

flexural strength Qmu in term of shear is calculated from wMu by equation (1) as 1065kN for the

specimens CW, OW, OW-SRF, 1008kN for IW, IW-SRF, 1109 for OWF, which are much higher than

the shear strengths. The calculated shear strengths were derived from the following empirical

design(mean) equation (2), and are shown in the hysteretic relations in Figure 5 with dotted lines:

Qmu=(agσy+0.5awvσwy+0.5

M u = at ⋅ sy ⋅ l w + 0.5 (a wv ⋅ wy ) ⋅ l w + 0.5 N ⋅ l w (1) N)xlw/(M/Q)

w

0.068p te0 .23 (18 + F c ) (2)

Qsu= 0.068pt0.23

Q su = { + 0.85 p se ⋅ wy + 0.1 } ⋅ b e ⋅ je

M /( Q lw ) + 0 . 12

0e

where, pte: reinforcement ratio of tensile main bars at to total sectional area Aw+2Ac (unit in per cent,

=at/(Aw+2Ac)), Fc: design nominal strength, M/Q: moment-to-shear ratio, lw: wall depth from center

to center of boundary columns, pwh: effective lateral web reinforcement ratio in the wall panel (=aw/(s

twe)), awh: area of lateral web reinforcement at the spacing of s, awv: total area of vertical reinforcing

bars in the wall panel, twe: equivalent thickness of wall (Aw+2Ac)/Lw), tw: thickness of wall panel,

Ac: area of column, Aw: area of wall panel(=twxlw'), lw': wall panel inner depth within boundary

column, Lw: total depth(=lw'+2Dc), Dc: column depth, j: effective depth(=lw).

Although the calculated strengths for the specimens "CW" and "IW" are close to each other as

planned, the observed maximum strength of the specimen "IW" was slightly lower, 0.92 times that of

the specimen "CW." The increase in CW is the effect of the boundary columns. The shear strength of

the wall without boundary columns was slightly lower but close to the "mean" calculation so that the

seismic performance is basically equivalent or slightly lower than that of the wall with boundary

columns, though further investigation is needed for general evaluation.

8

AIJ standard for structural calculation of buildings(AIJ, 1999) has provided a reduction factor for

evaluation of the allowable strength of a wall with an opening. The same formula has been applied to

the evaluation of ultimate shear strength as well. However, neither codes nor guidelines in Japan have

prescribed general evaluation methods for the wall with multiple openings so that practical evaluation

has been left to engineers. Based on the reduction factor in the AIJ standard, a formula is proposed

using the following equations (2) for the cases with multiple openings in general location as:

h0

Qsuo = r Qsu, r = min(r1 , r2 ) , r1 = 1 − 0

, r2 = 1 − 0

(3)

h

where, Qsu: The calculated shear strength of the wall without openings, Qsuo: The calculated shear

strength of the wall with openings, l Ä The span length from center to center of boundary columns, h Ä

The story height from center to center of boundary beams, l0 Ä The width of each opening ( Σ accounts

for the sum of the projective lengths of all openings), h0 Ä The height of each opening (Σ accounts for

the sum of the projective heights of all openings). The above equation is proposed for the evaluation of

the strength reduction of wall due to openings even in the cases where multiple openings are located

irregularly as well.

As for the specimens, the allocation and the shape are regular so that the two openings are to be

regarded as equivalent as an opening having the sum total area of the two. The reduction factor is

calculated as 0.6 for the three specimens with openings. The shear strengths of the specimens "OW",

"OWF" and "OW-SRF" are calculated using the reduction factor of 0.6. The observed reduction ratio

in the maximum strength of the specimen "OW" to that of the non-opening specimen "CW" was 0.59,

which was very close to the calculated factor. It may be concluded the above application method to

multiple openings is appropriate. The observed reduction ratio of the specimen "OWF" to the

specimen "CW" was 0.72, which was apparently higher than the calculated factor owing to the effect

of the heavy web reinforcement in the wall panel. Therefore, the higher web reinforcement is used

calculation of the shear strength, where the observed strength is still higher than the calculated. It may

be concluded the reinforcing of the wall panel and the sidewall around the openings is much more

effective to the wall strength than estimated by applying the current design equation.

Although the strengths are reduced due to the openings, it should be noted that the deformability is

obviously and generally much higher that that of the specimen "CW" without openings. This is also

due to the type of loading where relatively small moment-to-shear ratio was selected. The

deformability of the specimen "OWF," is much more higher probably owing to heavy shear

reinforcement in the wall panel. It should also be noted that the axial capacity after shear compression

failure was stable until the end of testing, which was only one specimen among the four reinforced

concrete specimen except for the sheet strengthened specimen. These test results on the ultimate

deformability and hysteretic energy dissipation capacity will be discussed elsewhere in detail with

theoretical model for calculation.

The effect of the polyester sheet on the shear strength was evaluated by adding an equivalent web

reinforcement ratio to the steel web reinforcement ratio in the empirical design equation(2). The

equivalent web reinforcement ratio of the sheet is determined here empirically from the measured

strains on the sheet at the maximum strength in the test. Then the calculated incremental shear strength

may be expressed in the form as equation (4). This equation might be much underestimate the test

results so that the increment by equation (5) based on truss action is also examined:

Å

Q2 = r ( p wh ⋅ σ sy + p f ⋅ σ f − p wh ⋅ σ sy ) ⋅ 0.85 ⋅ t e ⋅ j (4)

Æ

Q1 = r p f ⋅ σ f ⋅ t e ⋅ j (5)

where, pwh: equivalent lateral steel web reinforcement ratio, σsy: yield stress of web reinforcing steel, pf

9

: equivalent ratio of sheet as web reinforcement, σf: stress in the sheet determined empirically. The

observed strains at maximum shear strength in positive and negative directions are shown in Figure 7,

although the strains are both tensile direction. The abscissa for the strains is shown above the figure.

The incremental shear by the sheet can be calculated from the observed strains and expressed simply

by the abscissa as in the bottom in case of the equation (5). The shear calculated from the equation (4)

is also plotted in the figure. On the other hand, the measured incremental strengths of the maximum

strengths for the specimens IW-SRF and OW-SRF compared respectively to those of the specimens

IW and OW, are shown with dashed red lines. The increments of IW-SRF are higher than estimated

from eq.(4) and eq.(5), especially in negative direction. As for OW-SRF, the increment corresponded

well to eq.(4) and lower than eq.(5). In this case, the strength was determined by the flexural yielding

mechanism so that the effect of the sheet was partially to the shear resistance mechanism and partially

much more to the very high deformability, owing to the proper confinement details.

% strain

Higth(mm)

Higth(mm)

(a)IW-SRF

¦ ¦

a § IW-SRF kN b § OW-SRF kN

Figure7 Stains in the sheet and the incremental shear strengths 7

6 CONCLUSION

The shear strength of a wall without boundary columns was slightly less than that of the wall with

boundary columns. The strength reduction of the wall with two openings could be estimated by

applying conventional formula for an opening. Although the strength was reduced, the deformability

of the wall with opening was much higher than that of the wall without openings. The effectiveness of

polyester sheet on strength and deformability were verified in both cases with and without openings.

The confinement of the boundary columns with the sheet was effective to increase the deformability

and the axial load carrying capacity after shear failure. The measured increase or decrease in shear

strengths due to these effects could roughly be approximated with conventional design equations,

although further experimental and analytical investigations are needed.

REFERENCES:

Kabeyasawa, T., Tasai, A., Igarashi, S., 2001. An Economical and Efficient Method of Strengthening Reinforced

Concrete Columns against Axial Load Collapse during Major Earthquake. Proceedings of the Third

Workshop on Performance-based Engineering on Reinforced Concrete Building Structures. pp. 371-384.

Kabeyasawa, T., Tasai, A., Igarashi, S., 2002. An Economical and Efficient Method of Preventing Old

Reinforced Concrete Buildings from Collapse under Major Earthquake. Proceedings of 7NCEE. CD-ROM.

Kabeyasawa, T., Igarashi, S., Kim, Y-S., 2004. Shaking table test of reinforced concrete frames for verification

of seismic strengthening with polyester sheet. Proceedings, 13th World Conference on Earthquake

Engineering. Paper No. 402.

Toshimi Kabeyasawa, Msaki Murase, Yasushi Sanada, Dinh Van Thuat, Shunichi Igarashi, 2005. Strengthening

of Reinforced Concrete Walls with a New Details Using Polyester Sheet. Proceedings of ISEE Kobe, Volume

2, C-315-C-324.

Architectural Institute of Japan, 1999. "AIJ Standard for Structural Calculation of Reinforced Concrete

Structures 1999 edtion (in Japanese)."

Building Center of Japan, 2000. "Design Guidelines for Structural Calculation (in Japanese)."

10

- Anchor Bolts - Concrete Capacity Design.pdfTransféré parGraham Roberts
- U.K.Singh_Manufacturing_ProcessesTransféré parGirish Dey
- A Parametric Study on Fatigue Strength of Spot Weld JointsTransféré parZiad Al Sarraf
- Fire Resistance DesignTransféré parPrantik Adhar Samanta
- Elastic Properties of RCC under Flexural LoadingTransféré parIJMER
- wangzhiliang109612-201008-13[1]Transféré parhamadani
- BTH-1-2008Transféré parEnriqueGD
- Tensile TestTransféré parLilac Class
- ACI_Sezen_Setzler_2008-Reinforcement Slip in Reinforced Concrete ColumnsTransféré parTeddy Susanto
- Lifting LugTransféré parjilkos
- 0910SEM1-ME4254Transféré parJoanna Lock
- Sagaseta09bTransféré paroqusous
- DESIGN OF BEARING PADTransféré parJunaid
- Equation Sheet S17 (1)Transféré parSyed Fraz Ali
- Chapter+1+spring+3013Transféré parMartin Ordoñez
- Basic Bone Science ModuleTransféré parRebecca Wong
- 1-s2.0-S1877705815045518-mainTransféré parStefano Barbieri
- 1-s2.0-S0020768305000624-mainTransféré parVaibhav Mittal
- LectureTransféré pardvarsastry
- 12594941_Main.pdfTransféré parmgrubisic
- 7.1 Yagnik Effect of Hydride DistributionTransféré parRidho Ryswaldi
- Mechanical Properties of MaterialsTransféré parNeel Peswani
- 00b4952b4b0c1cceab000000Transféré parjanaaidaas1996
- Seminar Slides_Performance Based Design_2016-04-29.pdfTransféré paraliomair
- Punching of Slabs.pdfTransféré parHyunkyoun Jin
- 9Transféré parThulasi Raman Kowsigan
- Biocompatibility & Mechanical PropertiesTransféré parPavan Preetham
- Defining and Predicting Housing Strength for Mounted BearingsTransféré parDaniel Flores
- Exam 1 SolutionTransféré parMeleti Meleti Meletiou
- 21Transféré parStefan Milojević

- WCEE2012_0348Transféré parSergio Ito Sunley
- IJEDR1401101 Comparison of Raft Foundation and Beam & SlabTransféré parSergio Ito Sunley
- ACI 207.1R-96Transféré parmariaperafan
- 117_90Transféré parSergio Ito Sunley
- ACI-117-R90Transféré parRafael Elgueta Aravena
- WCEE2012_1017Transféré parSergio Ito Sunley
- El Salvador 2001 EarthquakeTransféré parSergio Ito Sunley

- Design Chapter 1 2 & 16 mark q&ATransféré parRenold Elsen
- BOQ SampleTransféré parbolsamir
- Dental CompositesTransféré parMavic Mahinay
- TANK101-104 Process Piping IsometricTransféré parSaravanan Mohanraj
- Kumkang Aluminium Formwork System PresentationsTransféré parMadusha Tissera
- Lecture-3 [Compatibility Mode]Transféré parPrabhsimran Singh
- p_cocon_q_enTransféré parscribd99190
- shrinkage_strip_method_statment_and_ther.pdfTransféré parhakim2020
- Numerical in Electrical, Mechanical, Electronic, Optical materials from different books along with previous year papers of GATE, ES, CS and other exams.Transféré parRehan Sharma
- Idiots Guide to Crack Filling.pdfTransféré parJessica Velasquez
- Resume Gordon NEWTransféré parsharon
- Specs, Loads, & Methods of DesignTransféré parOsama Tamari
- How to Fix Ceramic TilesTransféré parBob Kowalski
- Pipe Sizing Steam Supply and Condensate Return Lines Sizing Charts Chart CG-25, page CG-51, is the basic chart for determining the flow rate and velocity of steam in Schedule 40 pipe for various values of pressure drop per 100 ft, based on 0 psig saturated steam. Using the multiplier chart (Chart CG-24), Chart CG-25 can be used at all saturation pressures between 0 and 200 psig (see Example). These Charts are based on the Moody Friction Factor, which considers the Reynolds number and the roughness of the internal pipe surfaces. Notes: Based on Moody Friction Factor where flow of condensate does not inhibit the flow of steam. See Chart CG-24 for obtaining flow rates and velocities of all saturation pressures between 0 to 200 psig: see Example. Pipe Sizing Two principal factors determine pipe sizing in a steam system: 1. The initial pressure at the boiler and the allowable pressure drop of the total system. The total pressure drop in the system should not exceed 20% ofTransféré par1970aco
- 1Transféré parDheeraj Rai
- IES Civil Engineering 2009Transféré parmathivanans2007
- Belimo CCV Databook V8.6 05.2017 4Transféré parkautuk
- Corrosion DataTransféré parAhmedA.Hassan
- Test of Wet and Hardened ConcreteTransféré paressy_ab
- Work-hardening stages of AA1070 and AA6060 after severe plastic deformationTransféré parCarlos Carvalhal
- Cement ConsumptionTransféré parAliasgar Lokhandwala
- 09 72 00 Terrazzo FlooringTransféré parKiran D Anvekar
- Comparative Study of RC Framed Structures Using Spectra Based Pushover AnalysisTransféré parMihai Soplica Pancu
- Titus Selection of DiffuserTransféré parhanyassawy
- SikaWrap-230 C.pdfTransféré parMatteo Breveglieri
- tgk-gt-4050.general-manual.pdfTransféré parbhizart
- MasterFibre Econo-Net.pdfTransféré parbeck.26
- Ahu 1Transféré parchepurthi
- Man Hour EstimationTransféré parhemanth321
- BN-DS-E03 Electrical Design Direct Burial of CablesTransféré parvineets058