Experimental Study on Residual Axial Load Capacity of R/C Columns

Abstract

Standard fbr evaluating method of seismic performances of exis 電ing R 〆 C buildings revised in 2001 showed evaluating methods of rcsidual axia1 置 oad capacity and ax 孟 al load capacity ， which had dramatic effects on seismic performance indcxes． In this study the feasibility of this method was discussed using experimental data ． For this purpose static loading tests of RIC co 正 umns were conducted ． Main variable was loading methods ；i， e ， monoton 孟 c centric axial loading ， eccentric axial loading under constant lateral drift and normal reversed lateral loading llnder conslant axial lead ． An evaKuating met 甑od ofresidual axia 弖kQad capachy was proposed and compared with the standard ．

Study of the residual axial capacities of shear-damaged reinforced concrete columns: Part 1—development of an evaluation model

“…In a previous study (Kato et al, 2008), the friction coefficient ( μ ) of the concrete cutting planes was set to 0.77, and the calculated residual axial capacities were consistent with the experimental results. Furthermore, in a previous study (Elwood and Moehle, 2005), based on the experimental results, the calculated friction coefficient ( μ ) was approximately 0.6–1.8, which varied in a wide range.…”

“…Furthermore, in a previous study (Elwood and Moehle, 2005), based on the experimental results, the calculated friction coefficient ( μ ) was approximately 0.6–1.8, which varied in a wide range. In this study, with reference to these previous studies (Elwood and Moehle, 2005; Kato et al, 2008), the friction coefficient ( μ ) is tentatively set to 0.6.…”

“…For RC buildings with earthquake-induced damage, several evaluation models have been proposed based on theory or experimental analysis to estimate the residual axial capacities of shear-damaged columns. These evaluation models can be divided into the following three types: (1) theoretical models (Elwood and Moehle, 2005; Matsukawa, 2013; Ousalem, 2006; Tran, 2010; Uchida and Uezono, 2003); (2) semi-empirical models (Kato et al, 2008; Nakamura and Yoshimura, 2002); and (3) empirical models (Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association (JBDPA), 2005). However, the residual axial capacities of RC frames have not yet been sufficiently studied, and the related previous studies are very limited (Elwood and Moehle, 2008; Ghannoum and Moehle, 2012; Murray and Sasani, 2017).…”

Effects of Loading Conditions and Hoop Details on Residual Axial Load Capacity of R/C Columns Failing in Shear

“…For this purpose, both the axial loading test and the lateral loading test were conducted using specimens having the same physical properties. In this study, the effects of loading conditions and hoop reinforcing details on the residual axial load capacity of R/C columns were examined using the test results reported by Kato (2007Kato ( ,2008 Fig.1. shows the cross section and reinforcing details of the test specimens.…”

Experimental Study on the Residual Axial Load-Carrying Capacity of Shear-Damaged RC Columns

“…These evaluation models can be divided into the following three types: (1) theoretical models (Uchida and Uezono 2003;Elwood and Moehle 2005;Ousalem 2006;Tran 2010;Matsukawa 2013), (2) semi-empirical models (Nakamura and Yoshimura 2002;Kato et al 2008), and (3) empirical models (Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association -JBDPA 2005). Although these evaluation models can estimate the residual axial capacities of shear-damaged RC columns to a certain extent, they do not clearly explain the limit state of axial collapse of columns and do not appropriately consider the interaction between the concrete core and longitudinal bars.…”