Modelling the catenary effect in the progressive collapse analysis of concrete structures

Naji, Arash

doi:10.1002/suco.201500065

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Naji, [15], using Limit Analysis, modeled the effect of catenary action on resistance of concrete frame structures against progressive collapse. In this regard, nonlinear optimization was performed.…”

Section: Progressive Collapse Analysis Of Reinforced Concretementioning

confidence: 99%

Progressive Collapse Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures: A Simplified Procedure

Naji¹,

Rohani²

2017

EJERS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, a simplified analysis procedure to calculate the column removed point displacement at progressive collapse analysis of reinforced concrete structures is proposed. The energy absorption capacity under the column missing event is used for formulations. The approximate method is simple to utilize, user friendly, yet accurate. For progressive collapse analysis of structures, linear static analysis, nonlinear static analysis, linear dynamic analysis and nonlinear dynamic analysis can be performed. In this paper, the nonlinear static analysis from alternate load path method is used and the reason of initial local collapse has not been considered. In fact, an energy-based method by using load-displacement curve of RC frame and considering the effect of floor slab for the progressive collapse analysis is considered. The accuracy of the proposed method is demonstrated by comparing the results to three experimental and analytical results. Finally, the effects of the spans length, sections dimensions, material properties and the beams reinforcements of column removed spans on substructure behavior is studied, as well.

show abstract

Section: Progressive Collapse Analysis Of Reinforced Concretementioning

confidence: 99%

Progressive Collapse Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures: A Simplified Procedure

Naji¹,

Rohani²

2017

EJERS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, Qian and Li tested seven one‐third scale RC beam‐column substructures under a corner column removal scenario to investigate their performance. Previous progressive collapse tests of an RC plane frame under an interior column removal scenario by Yi et al, Lew et al, and Nima et al demonstrated that RC frames exhibit two progressive collapse‐resisting mechanisms: for small deformations, the structural collapse resistance is provided by the flexural capacity of the beam ends, and axial pressure is generated within the frame beam, resulting in a “compressive arch action”; in contrast, for large deformations, the collapse resistance is a result of the catenary action through the tension of reinforcement steel . Lin et al proposed a novel structural detailing for the improvement of seismic and progressive collapse performances of RC frames.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental investigation of asymmetrical reinforced concrete spatial frame substructures against progressive collapse under different column removal scenarios

Bai

Teng

et al. 2020

Structural Design Tall Build

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…The focus of most researchers has been on the ALP method (Naji and Irani, 2012;Elsanadedy et al, 2014;Naji, 2016;Ruth et al, 2006;Fu et al, 2016;Parisi and Augenti, 2012;Brunesi et al, 2015) without considering the remaining two approaches.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the tie force method for progressive collapse design of RC frames

Naji

2018

IJSI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to recover the deficiency of existing tie force (TF) methods by considering the decrease in section strength due to cracking and by selecting limit state of collapse according to section properties. Design/methodology/approach A substructure is selected by isolating the connected beams from the entire structure. For interior joints, the TFs in the orthogonal beams are obtained by catenary action. For corner joints, the TFs are assessed by beam action. For edge joints, however, the resistance is gained by greater of the resistance under catenary action for periphery beams and beam action for all the connecting beams in both directions. For catenary action, the TF capacities must satisfy Equation (20). On the other hand, for beam action, the TF must satisfy Equation (16), while R is calculated from Equation (17). In the case where the length of the connecting beams is similar, Equation (19) can be used. Findings Closed form solutions are available for TFs on both beam and catenary stages. Originality/value The proposed formulation makes designing more practical and convenient. However, the proposed formulation had good agreement with experimental results.

show abstract

Modelling the catenary effect in the progressive collapse analysis of concrete structures

Cited by 15 publications

References 15 publications

Progressive Collapse Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures: A Simplified Procedure

Progressive Collapse Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures: A Simplified Procedure

Experimental investigation of asymmetrical reinforced concrete spatial frame substructures against progressive collapse under different column removal scenarios

Improving the tie force method for progressive collapse design of RC frames

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About