4.7 Article

Static vulnerability of an existing r.c. structure and seismic retrofitting by CFRP and base-isolation: A case study

Journal

SOIL DYNAMICS AND EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING
Volume 84, Issue -, Pages 1-12

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.01.010

Keywords

R.c. framed structures; Static vulnerability; Base-isolation; Carbon fibre reinforced polymers; Nonlinear dynamic analysis

Funding

  1. Re.L.U.I.S.(Italian network of university laboratories of earthquake engineering) [6]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The assessment of the static vulnerability under gravity loads of existing reinforced concrete (r.c.) framed buildings is a serious problem that requires the use of reliable methodologies to evaluate ductile and brittle mechanisms. The present work compares alternative formulations of member chord rotation and section and joint shear strength, proposed by Italian and European seismic codes and guidelines and other expressions available in the scientific literature. To this end, a r.c. framed building built sixty years ago with bi-directional (perimeter) and mono-directional (interior) plane frames, originally designed for five storeys then elevated to six during construction, is studied. A full characterization of the structure and its materials is carried out by means of destructive and non-destructive methods. Then, retrofitting based on the use of both innovative material, such as carbon fibre reinforced polymers (CFRP), and technology, such as base-isolation, are adopted to improve the static and seismic performances of the original structure. Finally, nonlinear analyses are carried out on a three-dimensional fibre model of the original and retrofitted structures, where an elastic linear law idealizes the behaviour of the CFRP up to tension failure and viscoelastic linear and bilinear models are used to idealize the behaviour of the elastomeric and sliding bearings, respectively. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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