Evaluation of ductility of structures and structural assemblages from laboratory testing

Park, R.

doi:10.5459/bnzsee.22.3.155-166

Cited by 780 publications

(370 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

358

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This information is also relevant for the calibration of the numerical models. The adopted loading paths are summarised in Figure 3, and the following nominal peak displacement levels (in mm) were considered: 3,5,10,4,12,15,7,20,25,30,35,40,45,50,55,60,65,70, 75 and 80.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The procedure adopted in this work for the determination of the yield displacement is based on the method proposed by Park [12], but it was adapted to be used in conjunction with the complete cyclic test results, while considering the possible hardening of the post-yield response. The adopted procedure is described as follows and illustrated in Figure 4:…”

Section: Yield Displacementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Experimental evaluation of rectangular reinforced concrete column behaviour under biaxial cyclic loading

Rodrigues

Arêde

Costa

2012

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY The cyclic behaviour of reinforced concrete columns has been the subject of many experimental studies in recent years. However, most of these studies have focused on the unidirectional loading of columns with square cross‐sections under constant axial loading conditions. In the present study, four types of full‐scale quadrangular building columns were tested under different types of loading, including uniaxial and biaxial loading conditions. The first two specimens of each column type were independently cyclically tested in the strong and weak directions. Bidirectional tests using different loading paths were performed on the other column specimens. All columns were tested under constant axial loading conditions. In this paper, the experimental results are presented, and the global behaviour of tested columns is discussed, particularly focusing on the stiffness and strength degradation because of the increasing cyclic demand. Finally, the deformation‐based performance limits proposed in Part 3 of Eurocode 8 were calculated and compared with the experimental results. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Yield Displacementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental evaluation of rectangular reinforced concrete column behaviour under biaxial cyclic loading

Rodrigues

Arêde

Costa

2012

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The baseline cyclic protocol applied to specimens CYC and CYC-DYN, provided in Table 2, was a modified version of the protocol recommended by Park. 2 Specimen CYC-DYN was tested dynamically using the baseline cyclic protocol applied as a sine wave with a period of 2.5 s. Table 3 shows the characteristics of the "Run 1" earthquake loadings applied as part of the earthquake-then-cyclic protocols. Two different maximum drifts in the earthquake "Run 1" were considered: 1.36% (herein rounded to 1.4%) and 2.17% (herein rounded to 2.2%).…”

Section: Experimental Programmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is presently a lack of consistency in the testing protocols being used for large-scale laboratory testing, although protocols typically consist of quasi-static, reversed cyclic loading with multiple cycles at each level of progressively increasing peak displacement demands. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] An example of one such loading protocol is shown in Figure 1. Under this loading protocol, the test specimen is subjected to 6 preyield cycles conducted under force control.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of variation in loading protocol on the strength and deformation capacity of ductile reinforced concrete beams

Marder

Motter

Elwood

et al. 2018

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Understanding the impact of prior earthquake damage on residual capacity is important for postearthquake damage assessment of buildings; however, interpretation of such impact is challenging when based on tests using traditional reversed‐cyclic loading protocols. A new loading protocol, consisting of a dynamic earthquake displacement history followed by quasi‐static reversed‐cyclic loading to failure, is presented as an alternative to traditional simulated seismic loading protocols. Data are analyzed from a set of 12 nominally identical ductile reinforced concrete beams that were tested by using variations of this protocol and traditional reversed‐cyclic and monotonic protocols. Differences in the cycle content of the earthquake displacement histories applied to the test specimens allowed for the effects of load history variation below 2.2% drift to be isolated. It is found that such variation had no effect on the beam deformation capacities. The effects of dynamic loading rates are also analyzed and compared against control quasi‐static specimens. Relative strength increases due to dynamic loading are found to be more significant at yield than at ultimate. Dynamic loading rates led to modest reductions in the beam deformation capacities, but the presence of causality between these variables remains uncertain.

show abstract

“…The lateral load versus displacement envelope curve was used to define the yield and ultimate displacements according to the method proposed by Park. 34 As shown in Figure 7, when area S 1 is equal to area S 2 , the position of point C is determined. The line CG, perpendicular to the transverse axis, intersects the P-Δ curve at point E.…”

Section: Displacement Ductilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Full‐scale tests of precast concrete beam‐column connections with composite T‐beams and cast‐in‐place columns subjected to cyclic loading

Xue

Yang²,

2019

Structural Concrete

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The precast concrete beam‐column connections investigated herein, designed and detailed to be emulative connections, consisted of composite concrete T‐beams and cast‐in‐place (CIP) concrete columns. This paper reported the test results of two full‐scale precast connections and two CIP control specimens under cyclic loading. Results revealed that all connections exhibited a strong column‐weak beam failure mechanism. The hysteresis loops of each precast connection were relatively plump and similar to those of its CIP control specimen, showing good energy dissipation capacity. The difference in load‐carrying capacity between precast connections and their CIP control specimens was about 6.5% for interior connections and about −2.2% for exterior connections. The average displacement ductility of precast interior connection and its CIP control specimen was 5.69 and 6.88, while that of precast exterior connection and its CIP control specimen was 4.18 and 4.40, respectively. A four‐fold line restoring force model was developed based on the test results.

show abstract

Evaluation of ductility of structures and structural assemblages from laboratory testing

Cited by 780 publications

References 10 publications

Experimental evaluation of rectangular reinforced concrete column behaviour under biaxial cyclic loading

Experimental evaluation of rectangular reinforced concrete column behaviour under biaxial cyclic loading

Effects of variation in loading protocol on the strength and deformation capacity of ductile reinforced concrete beams

Full‐scale tests of precast concrete beam‐column connections with composite T‐beams and cast‐in‐place columns subjected to cyclic loading

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About