Search

found 242 results

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Several concrete cladding panels were damaged during the 2011 Christchurch Earthquakes in New Zealand. Damage included partial collapse of panels, rupture of joint sealants, cracking and corner crushing. Installation errors, faulty connections and inadequate detailing were also contributing factors to the damage. In New Zealand, two main issues are considered in order to accommodate story drifts in the design of precast cladding panels: 1) drift compatibility of tieback or push-pull connections and 2) drift compatibility of corner joints. Tieback connections restrain the panels in the out-of-plane direction while allowing in-plane translation with respect to the building frame. Tieback connections are either in the form of slots or oversized holes or ductile rods usually located at the top of the panels. Bearing connections are also provided at the bottom of panels to transfer gravity loads. At the corners of a building, a vertical joint gap, usually filled with sealants, is provided between the two panels on the two orthogonal sides to accommodate the relative movement. In cases where the joint gap is not sufficient to accommodate the relative movements, panels can collide, generating large forces and the likely failure of the connections. On the other hand, large gaps are aesthetically unpleasing. The current design standards appear to recognize these issues but then leave most of the design and detailing to the discretion of the designers. In the installation phase, the alignment of panels is one of the main challenges faced by installers (and/or contractors). Many prefer temporary props to guide, adjust and hold the panels in place whilst the bearing connections are welded. Moreover, heat generated from extensive welding can twist the steel components inducing undesirable local stresses in the panels. Therefore, the installation phase itself is time-consuming, costly and prone to errors. This paper investigates the performance of a novel panel system that is designed to accommodate lateral inter-story drift through a ‘rocking’ motion. In order to gauge the feasibility of the system, six 2m high precast concrete panels within a single-story steel frame structure have been tested under increasing levels of lateral cyclic drift at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. Three different panel configurations are tested: 1) a panel with return cover and a flat panel at a corner under unidirectional loading, 2) Two adjacent flat panels under unidirectional loading, and 3) Two flat panels at another oblique corner under bidirectional loading. A vertical seismic joint of 25 mm, filled with one-stage joint sealant, is provided between two of the panels. The test results show the ability of the panels with ‘rocking’ connection details to accommodate larger lateral drifts whilst allowing for smaller vertical joints between panels at corners, quick alignment and easy placement of panels without involving extensive welding on site.

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of the panel discussion during the fifth plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The panel is made up of keynote speaker Professor Jonathan Davidson, and guests Associate Professor John Vargo and Associate Professor Sarbjit Johal.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

The Panel Christmas Special in downtown Auckland atop the Tyler Street Garage, featuring many of the regular panellists from 2011. Due to a Checkpoint special covering the Christchurch earthquake, this was not broadcast.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The aim of this report is to investigate the ductile performance of concrete tilt-up panels reinforced with cold-drawn mesh to improve the current seismic assessment procedure. The commercial impact of the project was also investigated. Engineering Advisory Group (EAG) guidelines state that a crack in a panel under face loading may be sufficient to fracture the mesh. The comments made by EAG regarding the performance of cold-drawn mesh may be interpreted as suggesting that assessment of such panels be conducted with a ductility of 1.0. Observations of tilt-up panel performance following the Christchurch earthquakes suggest that a ductility higher than μ=1.0 is likely to be appropriate for the response of panels to out-of-plane loading. An experimental test frame was designed to subject ten tilt-panel specimens to a cyclic quasi-static loading protocol. Rotation ductility, calculated from the force-displacement response from the test specimens, was found to range between 2.9 and 5.8. Correlation between tensile tests on 663L mesh, and data collected from instrumentation during testing confirmed that the mesh behaves as un-bonded over the pitch length of 150mm. Recommendation: Based on a moment-rotation assessment approach with an un-bonded length equal to the pitch of the mesh, a rotation ductility of μ=2.5 appears to be appropriate for the seismic assessment of panels reinforced with cold-drawn mesh.