Tests on slender ductile structural walls designed according to New Zealand Standard

Dashti, Farhad; Dhakal, Rajesh; Pampanin, Stefano

doi:10.5459/bnzsee.50.4.504-516

Cited by 21 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Out-of-plane instability failures were commonly observed following the recent 2010 Chile and 2011 Christchurch Earthquakes [1][2][3]. Since these two earthquakes, many research efforts have been initiated, including two separate large scale testing programs by Dashti, Dhakal and Pampanin [4,5] and Rosso, Almeida and Beyer [6]. It should be noted though, that there is some dispute as to whether these observed failures we due to a 'global' out-of-plane buckling mechanism like what was report by Paulay and Priestley [7] some 25 years ago, or rather from a 'localised' out-of-plane instability caused by asymmetric crushing/spalling of concrete and buckling of the vertical reinforcement (refer Segura and Wallace [8]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Testing of Nonductile Reinforced Concrete Wall Boundary Elements

Menegon¹,

Wilson²,

Lam³

et al. 2019

ACI Structural Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

interests include the design and experimental assessment of RC walls and the collapse behaviour of non-ductile RC buildings in lower seismic regions. ABSTRACT This paper presents an overview and results of a recent experimental testing program of nonductile reinforced concrete (RC) wall boundary elements. The experimental program consisted of seventeen boundary element prism specimens that are meant to represent the end regions of non-ductile RC walls. The failure mechanisms of interest were global out-of-plane buckling and local bar buckling of the vertical reinforcement. The matrix of test specimens included:high and low slenderness ratios (i.e. high-to-thickness ratio); cast in-situ and precast wall construction methods; and specimens that were detailed with either a single central layer of vertical reinforcement or two layers of vertical reinforcement, one per face. Strain-rate affects were also assessed in the experimental program. The paper is concluded with a detailed discussion of the test results, comparisons with similar experimental programs and design models in literature and guidance on tensile strain limits for the displacement-based design of non-ductile RC walls.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Testing of Nonductile Reinforced Concrete Wall Boundary Elements

Menegon¹,

Wilson²,

Lam³

et al. 2019

ACI Structural Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Experimental testing of four slender rectangular walls ranging in thickness, length and axial load and comparison of the observations with the FEM predictions. [14,15,40] Verify existing analytical models for the global out-of-plane instability/buckling mechanism and evaluate the suitability of the existing requirements in NZS 3101:2006-A3 [46] for prevention of out-of-plane instability.…”

Section: The Mbie Wall Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Programme on Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Walls: Key Recommendations

SHEGAY

Dashti

Hogan

et al. 2020

BNZSEE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A wide range of reinforced concrete (RC) wall performance was observed following the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes, with most walls performing as expected, but some exhibiting undesirable and unexpected damage and failure characteristics. A comprehensive research programme, funded by the Building Performance Branch of the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and involving both numerical and experimental studies, was developed to investigate the unexpected damage observed in the earthquakes and provide recommendations for the design and assessment procedures for RC walls. In particular, the studies focused on the performance of lightly reinforced walls; precast walls and connections; ductile walls; walls subjected to bi-directional loading; and walls prone to out-of-plane instability. This paper summarises each research programme and provides practical recommendations for the design and assessment of RC walls based on key findings, including recommended changes to NZS 3101 and the NZ Seismic Assessment Guidelines.

show abstract

“…The average strain captured by the potentiometers that were attached to the concrete core provided a good matching with the reinforcement strain measurements which is a sign of minimal bond slip between concrete and reinforcement in this specimen until 3.0% drift level. The instrumentation is described in more detail in Dashti and Dashti et al…”

Section: Experimental Programmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Geometry and reinforcement configuration of the specimen reinforcement in this specimen until 3.0% drift level. The instrumentation is described in more detail in Dashti 15 and Dashti et al 21 4 | SPECIMEN RESPONSE Figure 7A displays the lateral load versus top displacement response of the specimen. Out-of-plane instability was the primary failure pattern of the specimen and neither bar fracture nor bar buckling was observed in the test.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of out‐of‐plane deformation and subsequent instability in rectangular RC walls under in‐plane cyclic loading: Experimental observation

Dashti

Dhakal

Pampanin

2018

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary In this study, to understand the causes and consequences of out‐of‐plane instability in rectangular RC walls, the sequence of events observed during a rectangular wall experiment campaign where out‐of‐plane instability was the primary failure pattern is discussed in detail. Large tensile strains developed in the boundary zone longitudinal bars at large in‐plane curvature demands and caused subsequent yielding in compression during load reversal before crack closure could activate contribution of concrete to the load‐carrying capacity of the wall. The specimen deformed in the out‐of‐plane direction when this phenomenon progressed along a sufficient height and length of the wall and led to significant reduction of its stiffness in the out‐of‐plane direction. One of the major sources of inherent eccentricity that could potentially affect development of this failure pattern is identified to be the postyield response of the longitudinal bars across the wall thickness, generating different values of residual strains and consequently inducing their asynchronous yielding under compressive actions. Analytical models proposed in literature for prediction of out‐of‐plane instability failure as well as their relevant assumptions are compared with the test measurements. While the observations presented in past research on development of out‐of‐plane instability in concrete columns representing the boundary zones of rectangular walls are in line with the sequence of events observed in this study, the assumptions made in the analytical models regarding the height of the wall effectively involved in formation of out‐of‐plane deformations (effective buckling height) were found to be different.

show abstract

Tests on slender ductile structural walls designed according to New Zealand Standard

Cited by 21 publications

References 8 publications

Experimental Testing of Nonductile Reinforced Concrete Wall Boundary Elements

Experimental Testing of Nonductile Reinforced Concrete Wall Boundary Elements

Research Programme on Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Walls: Key Recommendations

Evolution of out‐of‐plane deformation and subsequent instability in rectangular RC walls under in‐plane cyclic loading: Experimental observation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About