Search

The vertical component of ground motions can affect the seismic performance of reinforced concrete (RC) piers as significant as its horizontal counterpart. However, real‐time testing for RC piers subjected to both horizontal and vertical ground motions has been scarcely conducted due to the difficulty in multi‐axial control of actuators. In this study, the seismic response of a bridge RC pier was investigated by conducting real‐time hybrid simulation (RTHS), where the RC pier was physically tested in the laboratory and the bridge superstructure was numerically modeled. The test setup that can synchronously apply both horizontal and vertical ground motions was constructed by using three dynamic actuators and a flexible loading beam (FLB). The lateral response of the RC pier was investigated by varying the intensities for vertical ground motions, while the same intensity for horizontal ground motion is used. It was found that the axial force from the dead load of superstructure can significantly affect the initial stiffness, strength, and post‐yield response of the RC pier. For the selected earthquake ground motions, however, the intensity of vertical ground motion did not make a substantial difference in the lateral response, although there was a notable difference in the fracture pattern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: In a building subjected to seismic loading, large compressive force may develop in reinforced concrete (RC) coupling beams because of axial restraint imposed by the neighboring shear walls against the elongation of the coupling beams during the failure process. The axially compressive force can increase the shear stiffness and strength of the coupling beam and may change its failure mode. In this paper, a novel coupling beam testing procedure adopting hybrid simulation method is proposed in which the axial restraint is determined through hybrid simulation and the calculated axial restraint is imposed on a specimen during the test. RC coupling beams were tested by adopting both the proposed test procedure and the conventional testing approach in which the effect of the axial restraint is not accounted for. Test results depict a clear difference in the response of the coupling beam, such as shear capacity and failure mode, depending on the consideration of the axial restraint during the test. The test outcome demonstrates the usefulness and applicability of the proposed test procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most of existing steel multi-storey frames in Europe have been designed before the introduction of modern seismic design provisions, hence they often exhibit low performance under earthquake loads due to their low lateral resistance and energy dissipation capacity. In addition, such structures often include rigid and brittle masonry infill walls that highly influence their lateral response and distribution of damage pattern. However, current procedures for the assessment of existing steel buildings in Europe, included in the Eurocode 8 – Part 3 (EC8–3), do not provide adequate guidance for the assessment of 'weak' steel frame with masonry infill walls. Moreover, most of available modelling approaches of masonry infills formerly developed for reinforced concrete (RC) structures do not properly represent the behaviour of infill walls in steel frames. An improved numerical has to be provided to satisfactorily mimic infill walls' behaviour in steel moment frames. To this end, an experimental and theoretical study was carried out within the framework of HITFRAMES (i.e., HybrId Testing of an Existing Steel Frame with Infills under Multiple EarthquakeS) SERA project. This paper firstly presents the limitations of current EC8–3 by conducting a code-based assessment on a case study steel moment frame using pushover analysis. Three different single strut models, widely used for simulating the presence of masonry infills in RC structures, are considered for the numerical analyses. The paper also presents the results of pseudo-dynamic (PsD) tests performed on a large-scale 3D steel frame with masonry infills. The capability of the different masonry infill models is successively evaluated by comparisons between numerical and experimental results. On the basis of the obtained results, recommendations on how to potentially improve the single strut model for masonry infills surrounded by steel frames are also provided. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]