4.7 Article

Ductility evaluation of precast RC shear walls in Italian existing buildings

Journal

ENGINEERING STRUCTURES
Volume 240, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112256

Keywords

Precast RC shear walls; Ductility; Existing buildings; Seismic assessment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper investigates the seismic behavior of structural RC shear walls made with precast panels according to proprietary technologies, showing that these walls have similar or greater ductility than cast-in-place shear walls from the same period.
This paper investigates the seismic behaviour of structural RC shear walls made with precast panels according to several proprietary technologies to build existing structures. The study focuses on determining the maximum ductility of these construction systems through in-plane lateral thrust numerical simulations by means of FE analysis. The investigations are carried out on three types of precast constructions systems, each one characterized by its own details and reinforcements, used to construct many buildings in central Italy between the early 70 ' s and the late 80 ' s. For reference and comparison purposes a coeval cast-in-place shear wall has been also analysed. The ductility values obtained from the analyses show that the shear walls made with these techniques have a similar or, in some cases, grater ductility than the cast-in-place shear walls built in the same period. In detail the lowest value of ductility, equal to 3.42, has been obtained by the cast-in-place shear wall while ductility values in the range 4.15-6.29, have been obtained by the three precast RC assemblies. The results of this research may provide a support for the seismic vulnerability analysis of existing buildings constructed with precast RC shear walls and may supply information for the behaviour factors estimation of this type of structures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available