SUMMARY The progressive collapse resistance design approach is generally applied in the context of a “column‐removal” scenario to assess the structural vulnerability to progressive collapse. To obtain a better understanding of the complex progressive collapse resistance of 3D asymmetrical column‐beam‐slab systems, five one‐third scale 2 × 2 bay asymmetrical reinforced concrete (RC) spatial frame substructure specimens were tested to analyze their collapse mechanisms under five different column removal scenarios, namely, an interior column removal scenario (INT), an exterior column removal scenario in the asymmetrical direction (EXT‐X), an exterior column removal scenario in the symmetrical direction (EXT‐Y), a corner column removal scenario at the long bay (COR‐L), and a corner column removal scenario at the short bay (COR‐S), which are among the most critical scenarios for analyzing structural resistance against progressive collapse. The test results showed that INT had the highest progressive collapse resistance capacity among the scenario substructures and exhibited two progressive collapse‐resisting mechanism stages: a primary mechanism stage (beam and compressive membrane mechanism) under small deformations and a secondary mechanism stage (catenary and tensile membrane mechanism) under large deformations in both the X‐direction and the Y‐direction. In EXT‐X and EXT‐Y, the collapse resistance was mainly provided by the double‐span beam at both the primary mechanism stage and the secondary mechanism stage. In COR‐L and COR‐S, the tensile membrane mechanism could not be mobilized, as the single‐span beams in both the X‐direction and the Y‐direction behaved like cantilevers. Additionally, the asymmetrical span design reduced the resistance of the structure against progressive collapse.
Floor systems constructed from slabs and beams are critical structural elements of reinforced concrete (RC) frame structures, allowing them to resist progressive collapse. To elucidate the complex effects of the slab and its thickness on the progressive-collapse resistance of RC spatial frame structures, three 1/3-scale 2 × 2 span substructure specimens, including one three-dimensional (3D) skeletal frame substructure and two 3D frame–slab substructures with different slab thicknesses, were tested in a middle-column-removal scenario. The test results indicated that the frame–slab substructure exhibited two resisting progressive-collapse stages: a primary mechanism stage, with small deformations, and a secondary mechanism stage, with large deformations. The slab contributions were separated from the floor system and quantified by comparing the results for the skeletal frame substructure and frame–slab substructure. Although there were no in-plane confinements, the slab also significantly improved the resistance against progressive collapse, owing to the compressive and tensile membrane action in the primary and secondary mechanism stages, respectively. Increasing the slab thickness increased the compressive membrane action of the slab, which significantly enhanced the progressive-collapse resistance under small deformations. However, under large deformations, the beam and slab did not work synergistically, which limited the development of secondary mechanisms against progressive collapse.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.