Seismic risk assessment of three types of exterior beam-column joints using fragility curves

Abstract

The seismic risk assessments for one-third scales of three different types of reinforced concrete (RC) beam-column joints using fragility curves under Performance Based Earthquake Engineering (PBEE) are investigated. Three types of RC beam-column joints, as those with bracing (Type 1), overlapping of reinforcement (Type 2) and anchorage of longitudinal bars (Type 3), were tested and analyzed. The seismic performances of these joints were observed during experimental work and we classify the damage states according to the drift limit. Visual observation on crack propagations such as widths, diagonal cracks, crack patterns, spalling and crushing of the concrete on the joints together with buckling of longitudinal reinforced bar were examined. A fragility curve is used to evaluate the seismic risk assessment of these beam-column joints using a graph for colour coding system and damage limit states. Beam-column joint Type 3 has the least damage with 80% Confident Interval (CI) to survive under DBE (Design Basic Earthquake) and 55% CI under Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) followed by Type 1 and Type 2.

Cracks Monitoring and Resistivity Test for a Double-Storey House due to Cavity in the Soil

“…The structural damages due to earthquakes can be simulated and observed through experimental work in the laboratory. For example, the cracks and damages for three types of beam-column joint under vertical and in-plane lateral cyclic loading can be classified according to color coding, description of damage level, displacement, drift and ductility [3,4,5]. Based on these experimental works, moderate to minor damages of structures can be repaired, retrofitted and monitored the cracks propagation in the Heavy Structure Laboratory, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Selangor, Malaysia [6].…”

Stress-Strain Relationship of Unbonded Fuse Bars Subjected to In-Plane Lateral Cyclic Loading

“…The existing multi-storey and high-rise buildings in Malaysia which were designed in accordance with British Standard (BS8110-1:1997: Part 1: Code of practice for design and construction) did not have any provision for the earthquake which cause the failure and collapse of these buildings under severe or strong earthquake [1,3]. Previous study shows that interior, corner and exterior beamcolumn joint which were designed according to BS8110 can only sustain up to 1% drift [4,7,8]. Generally, the damages in RC buildings after the earthquake mostly occurred due to poor detailing, poor workmanship, low compressive strength of concrete, lack of transverse reinforcement at beam-column joints and strong beam-weak column mechanism [6].…”