Search

found 42 results

Images for walls; more images...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In most design codes, infill walls are considered as non-structural elements and thus are typically neglected in the design process. The observations made after major earthquakes (Duzce 1999, L’Aquila 2009, Christchurch 2011) have shown that even though infill walls are considered to be non-structural elements, they interact with the structural system during seismic actions. In the case of heavy infill walls (i.e. clay brick infill walls), the whole behaviour of the structure may be affected by this interaction (i.e. local or global structural failures such as soft storey mechanism). In the case of light infill walls (i.e. non-structural drywalls), this may cause significant economical losses. To consider the interaction of the structural system with the ‘non-structural ’infill walls at design stage may not be a practical approach due to the complexity of the infill wall behaviour. Therefore, the purpose of the reported research is to develop innovative technological solutions and design recommendations for low damage non-structural wall systems for seismic actions by making use of alternative approaches. Light (steel/timber framed drywalls) and heavy (unreinforced clay brick) non-structural infill wall systems were studied by following an experimental/numerical research programme. Quasi-static reverse cyclic tests were carried out by utilizing a specially designed full scale reinforced concrete frame, which can be used as a re-usable bare frame. In this frame, two RC beams and two RC columns were connected by two un-bonded post tensioning bars, emulating a jointed ductile frame system (PRESSS technology). Due to the rocking behaviour at the beam-column joint interfaces, this frame was typically a low damage structural solution, with the post-tensioning guaranteeing a linear elastic behaviour. Therefore, this frame could be repeatedly used in all of the tests carried out by changing only the infill walls within this frame. Due to the linear elastic behaviour of this structural bare frame, it was possible to extract the exact behaviour of the infill walls from the global results. In other words, the only parameter that affected the global results was given by the infill walls. For the test specimens, the existing practice of construction (as built) for both light and heavy non-structural walls was implemented. In the light of the observations taken during these tests, modified low damage construction practices were proposed and tested. In total, seven tests were carried out: 1) Bare frame , in order to confirm its linear elastic behaviour. 2) As built steel framed drywall specimen FIF1-STFD (Light) 3) As built timber framed drywall specimen FIF2-TBFD (Light) 4) As built unreinforced clay brick infill wall specimen FIF3-UCBI (Heavy) 5) Low damage steel framed drywall specimen MIF1-STFD (Light) 6) Low damage timber framed drywall specimen MIF2-TBFD (Light) 7) Low damage unreinforced clay brick infill wall specimen MIF5-UCBI (Heavy) The tests of the as built practices showed that both drywalls and unreinforced clay brick infill walls have a low serviceability inter-storey drift limit (0.2-0.3%). Based on the observations, simple modifications and details were proposed for the low damage specimens. The details proved to be working effectively in lowering the damage and increasing the serviceability drift limits. For drywalls, the proposed low damage solutions do not introduce additional cost, material or labour and they are easily applicable in real buildings. For unreinforced clay brick infill walls, a light steel sub-frame system was suggested that divides the infill panel zone into smaller individual panels, which requires additional labour and some cost. However, both systems can be engineered for seismic actions and their behaviour can be controlled by implementing the proposed details. The performance of the developed details were also confirmed by the numerical case study analyses carried out using Ruaumoko 2D on a reinforced concrete building model designed according to the NZ codes/standards. The results have confirmed that the implementation of the proposed low damage solutions is expected to significantly reduce the non-structural infill wall damage throughout a building.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

The current seismic design practice for reinforced concrete (RC) walls has been drawn into question following the unsatisfactory performance of several RC wall buildings during the Canterbury earthquakes. An overview of current research being undertaken at the University of Auckland into the seismic behaviour of RC walls is presented. The main objectives of this research project are to understand the observed performance of RC walls in Christchurch, quantify the seismic loads on RC walls, and developed improved design procedures for RC walls that will assist in revisions to the New Zealand Concrete Structures Standard. A database summarising the performance of RC wall buildings in the Christchurch CBD was collated to identify damage modes and case-study buildings. A detailed investigation is underway to verify the seismic performance of lightly reinforced concrete walls and initial numerical modeling and small-scale tests are presented in addition to details of planned experimental tests of RC walls. Numerical modelling is being used to understand the potential influence that interactions between walls and other structural elements have on the seismic response of buildings and the loads generated on RC walls. The results from finite element analysis of a severely damaged RC wall in Christchurch highlighted the effect that the floor diaphragms have on the distribution of shear stains in the wall.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

The 2011, 6.3 magnitude Christchurch earthquake in New Zealand caused considerable structural damage. It is believed that this event has now resulted in demolition of about 65-70% of the building stock in the Central Business District (CBD), significantly crippling economic activities in the city of Christchurch. A major concern raised from this event was adequacy of the current seismic design practice adopted for reinforced concrete walls due to their poor performance in modern buildings. The relatively short-duration earthquake motion implied that the observed wall damage occurred in a brittle manner despite adopting a ductile design philosophy. This paper presents the lessons learned from the observed wall damage in the context of current state of knowledge in the following areas: concentrating longitudinal reinforcement in wall end regions; determining wall thickness to prevent out-of-plane wall buckling; avoiding lap splices in plastic hinge zones; and quantifying minimum vertical reinforcement. http://www.2eceesistanbul.org/

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

The Christchurch earthquakes have highlighted the importance of low-damage structural systems for minimising the economic impacts caused by destructive earthquakes. Post-tensioned precast concrete walls have been shown to provide superior seismic resistance to conventional concrete construction by minimising structural damage and residual drifts through the use of a controlled rocking mechanism. The structural response of unbonded post-tensioned precast concrete wall systems, with and without additional energy dissipating elements, were investigated by means of pseudo-static cyclic, snap back and forced vibration testing with shake table testing to be completed. Two types of post-tensioned rocking wall system were investigated; a single unbonded post-tensioned precast concrete wall or Single Rocking Wall (SRW) and a system consisting of a Precast Wall with End Columns (PreWEC). The equivalent viscous damping (EVD) was evaluated using both the pseudo-static cyclic and snap back test data for all wall configurations. The PreWEC configurations showed an increase in EVD during the snap back tests in comparison to the cyclic test response. In contrast the SRW showed lower EVD during the snap back tests in comparison to the SRW cyclic test response. Despite residual drifts measured during the pseudo-static cyclic tests, negligible residual drift was measured following the snap back tests, highlighting the dynamic shake-down that occurs during the free vibration decay. Overall, the experimental tests provided definitive examples of the behaviour of posttensioned wall systems and validated their superior performance compared to reinforced concrete construction when subjected to large lateral drifts.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Axial elongation of reinforced concrete (RC) plastic hinges has previously been observed in a range of laboratory experiments, and more recently was observed in several Christchurch buildings following the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes. Axial restraint to plastic hinges is provided by adjacent structural components such as floors as the plastic hinges elongate, which can significantly alter the performance of the plastic hinge and potentially invalidate the capacity design strength hierarchy of the building. Coupling beams in coupled wall systems are particularly susceptible to axial restraint effects due to their importance in the strength hierarchy, the high ductility demands that they experience, and the large stiffness of bounding walls. From computational modelling it has been found that ignoring axial restraint effects when designing coupled walls can result in significantly increased strength, reduced ductility and reduced energy dissipation capacity. The complexity of the topic merits further research to better account for realistic restraint effects when designing coupled walls.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Between September 4, 2010 and December 23, 2011, a series of earthquakes struck the South Island of New Zealand including the city of Christchurch producing heavy damage. During the strongest shaking, the unreinforced masonry (URM) building stock in Christchurch was subjected to seismic loading equal to approximately 150-200% of code values. Post-earthquake reconnaissance suggested numerous failures of adhesive anchors used for retrofit connection of roof and floor diaphragms to masonry walls. A team of researchers from the Universities of Auckland (NZ) and Minnesota (USA) conducted a field investigation on the performance of new adhesive anchors installed in existing masonry walls. Variables included adhesive type, anchor diameter, embedment length, anchor inclination, and masonry quality. Buildings were selected that had been slated for demolition but which featured exterior walls that had not been damaged. A summary of the deformation response measured during the field tests are presented. AM - Accepted Manuscript