2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.12.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pseudo-dynamic tests on low-rise shear walls and simplified model based on the structural frequency drift

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Testing Campaign. As described in other publications [1,3,4,7], the wall specimens of the SAFE program were 13 with names T01⋅ ⋅ ⋅ T13 and they were all seismically tested in pure shear at the ELSA laboratory by means of the pseudodynamic (PsD) method, which is a hybrid testing technique by which the inertial forces are modelled numerically [8].…”
Section: Safe Program Data Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Testing Campaign. As described in other publications [1,3,4,7], the wall specimens of the SAFE program were 13 with names T01⋅ ⋅ ⋅ T13 and they were all seismically tested in pure shear at the ELSA laboratory by means of the pseudodynamic (PsD) method, which is a hybrid testing technique by which the inertial forces are modelled numerically [8].…”
Section: Safe Program Data Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, in the more recent work of Brun et al [4], the finite element model based on fixed smeared crack that had been used to produce dynamic response was now used to produce static pushover curves from which to extract the secant stiffness and derive the fundamental frequency at every level of displacement. Moreover, the derived ( ) curve for every wall was successfully compared with the equivalent envelope curve derived from the experimental results of the SAFE program.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the solutions available, monitoring the elongation of the fundamental period of buildings is a practical, efficient way to assess earthquake damage. Fundamental period (or frequency) is assumed to be a proxy for apparent structural stiffness and structural health [9][10][11][12][13]. For instance, the residual stiffness of masonry buildings from period measurements has been used to study the effect of seismic damage accumulation on macroseismic intensity assessment [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The difference is that these displacements are not known before the test and are calculated during the test using a step-by-step integration software. Although it is essentially a static test, it is a very complex technique to implement, mainly because a sophisticated adaptive control equipment is required [22][23][24][25].Third, there are the tests carried out on a shake table, which introduce a true dynamic excitation in the base of the structure. This is the most realistic technique for the seismic testing of structures, since the displacements (and therefore, the accelerations) are applied at the base and the structure is subjected to the inertial forces.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The difference is that these displacements are not known before the test and are calculated during the test using a step-by-step integration software. Although it is essentially a static test, it is a very complex technique to implement, mainly because a sophisticated adaptive control equipment is required [22][23][24][25].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%