Experimental study on seismic performance of fire-exposed perforated brick masonry wall

Zeng, Jin; Ma, Hao; Li, Cheng; Xu, Qingfeng; Li, Weibin

doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.254

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The previous peculiarities make European historical structures particularly vulnerable to extreme loads, such as those related to the effects of impact [5,6,7,8,9], blast [10,11,12,13,14], fire [15,16,17,18,19], and earthquake [20,21] actions. In particular, they are extremely vulnerable to the earthquakes even for low-medium intensity, as some recent inestimable damages in Mediterranean regions testify.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some of the Latest Active Strengthening Techniques for Masonry Buildings: A Critical Analysis

Ferretti

Pascale

2019

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present paper deals with the retrofitting of unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings, subjected to in-plane shear and out of-plane loading when struck by an earthquake. After an introductive comparison between some of the latest punctual and continuous active retrofitting methods, the authors focused on the two most effective active continuous techniques, the CAM (Active Confinement of Masonry) system and the Φ system, which also improve the box-type behavior of buildings. These two retrofitting systems allow increasing both the static and dynamic load-bearing capacity of masonry buildings. Nevertheless, information on how they actually modify the stress field in static conditions is lacking and sometimes questionable in the literature. Therefore, the authors performed a static analysis in the plane of Mohr/Coulomb, with the dual intent to clarify which of the two is preferable under static conditions and whether the models currently used to design the retrofitting systems are fully adequate.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some of the Latest Active Strengthening Techniques for Masonry Buildings: A Critical Analysis

Ferretti

Pascale

2019

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, fire tests on sandwich panels with TRC faces have been conducted [6][7][8]. The fire performance of TRC strengthened elements (of concrete or masonry) has been widely tested too [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]. However, in all these studies, the performance of the element does not depend solely on the thermal response and the thermomechanical performance of TRC, but also on the substrate and their interaction (i.e., bond strength).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

State-of-the-Art Review on Experimental Investigations of Textile-Reinforced Concrete Exposed to High Temperatures

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Textile-reinforced concrete (TRC) is a promising composite material with enormous potential in structural applications because it offers the possibility to construct slender, lightweight, and robust elements. However, despite the good heat resistance of the inorganic matrices and the well-established knowledge on the high-temperature performance of the commonly used fibrous reinforcements, their application in TRC elements with very small thicknesses makes their effectiveness against thermal loads questionable. This paper presents a state-of-the-art review on the thermomechanical behavior of TRC, focusing on its mechanical performance both during and after exposure to high temperatures. The available knowledge from experimental investigations where TRC has been tested in thermomechanical conditions as a standalone material is compiled, and the results are compared. This comparative study identifies the key parameters that determine the mechanical response of TRC to increased temperatures, being the surface treatment of the textiles and the combination of thermal and mechanical loads. It is concluded that the uncoated carbon fibers are the most promising solution for a fire-safe TRC application. However, the knowledge gaps are still large, mainly due to the inconsistency of the testing methods and the stochastic behavior of phenomena related to heat treatment (such as spalling).

show abstract

“…No Fan et al, 2012) 0.19 0.70 0.49 40 (Mazzotti et al, 2014) 0.13 0.65 0.73 2 (Han, 2011) 0.27 0.60 0.66 41 (Mazzotti et al, 2014) 0.13 1.04 0.99 3 (Lei et al, 2013) 0.18 0.60 0.59 42 (Mazzotti et al, 2014) 0.13 1.04 0.95 4 (Xiao et al, 2014) 0.24 0.15 0.44 43 (Mazzotti et al, 2014) 0.13 1.02 0.82 5 (Deng et al, 2015) 0.37 0.50 0.64 44 (Farooq et al, 2014) 0.81 0.50 0.48 6 (Zhang et al, 2015) 0.21 1.20 0.31 45 (Choi et al, 2016) 0.86 0.00 0.05 7 (Zhao et al, 2001) 0.27 1.20 0.67 46 (Gattulli et al, 2017) 0.12 0.50 0.11 8 (Wei and Zhou, 2006) 0.13 0.64 0.29 47 (Martinelli et al, 2016) 0.08 0.50 0.36 9 (Yang et al, 2008) 0 (Wang et al, 2003) 0.13 0.80 0.65 55 (Salmanpour et al, 2015) 0.98 0.40 0.24 17 (Wang et al, 2003) 0.18 1.00 0.73 56 (Salmanpour et al, 2015) 0.98 0.80 0.57 18 (Fang, 2009) 0.28 0.60 0.52 57 (Salmanpour et al, 2015) 0.98 0.60 0.28 19 (Fang, 2009) 0.28 0.30 0.45 58 (De Nardi et al, 2017) 0.19 0.60 0.50 20 (Zhu et al, 1984) 0.07 0.46 0.32 59 (Deng and Yang, 2018) 0.52 0.50 0.29 21 (Zhu et al, 1984) 0.12 0.46 0.38 60 (Deng and Yang, 2018) 0.64 0.50 0.32 22 (Shi, 2003) 0.3 0.9 0.76 61 (Karimi et al, 2016) 0.67 0.17 0.17 23 (Shi, 2003) 0.3 0.22 0.41 62 (Zhou et al, 2013) 0.64 0.60 0.44 24 (Zhu et al, 1980) 0.06 0.06 0.06 63 (Guerreiro et al, 2018) 0.64 0.32 0.24 25 (Zhu et al, 1980) 0.06 0.30 0.16 64 (Zhang et al, 2018) 0.48 0.60 0.33 26 (Zhu e...…”

Section: Orcid Idmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shear resistance estimation for unreinforced masonry walls based on Gaussian process models

Peng

Wei

Gang

et al. 2018

Advances in Structural Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uncertainty results in misestimate of the shear resistance of unreinforced masonry walls. The misestimate is difficult to correct using deterministic calculation models even when sophisticated numerical models are used. To address this issue, the authors converted the deterministic calculation models for shear resistance of unreinforced masonry walls into prior Gaussian process models and then collected experimental results to train the prior Gaussian process models. They evaluated the resultant posterior Gaussian process models and found two of them are preferable. The two favorable posterior Gaussian process models can well interpolate the collected experimental results and can predict the shear resistance of the unreinforced masonry walls in the authors' experiments with full information. The interpolation and predication demonstrate that the posterior Gaussian process models can combine and weight prior engineering judgments and observational information from experimental results and then can quantitatively specify the remaining uncertainty of the estimation. In addition, the Gaussian process models are efficient, favorable for reliability analysis, and easily improvable. Therefore, they are potentially useful in engineering practices.

show abstract

Experimental study on seismic performance of fire-exposed perforated brick masonry wall

Cited by 14 publications

References 10 publications

Some of the Latest Active Strengthening Techniques for Masonry Buildings: A Critical Analysis

Some of the Latest Active Strengthening Techniques for Masonry Buildings: A Critical Analysis

State-of-the-Art Review on Experimental Investigations of Textile-Reinforced Concrete Exposed to High Temperatures

Shear resistance estimation for unreinforced masonry walls based on Gaussian process models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About