4.7 Article

Experimental evaluation of seismic performance of precast segmental bridge piers with a Circular solid section

期刊

ENGINEERING STRUCTURES
卷 30, 期 12, 页码 3782-3792

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.07.005

关键词

Quasi-static test; Precast prestressed concrete bridge pier; Seismic performance; Displacement ductility; Energy absorption capacity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rapid bridge construction is in high demand in the construction industry, due to strict requirements on work-zone safety and traffic control during construction. Prefabricated bridge piers have been proposed for the fast construction of bridge substructures. This study deals with quasi-static tests on precast piers with bonded prestressing bars and steel tubes. One of the most crucial aspects in the design of precast prestressed concrete bridge piers is the seismic performance. Seven precast pier specimens with single-segment and two-segment systems were fabricated. The main test parameters were the number of prestressing bars, the prestressing force, and the location and number of joints between the segments. Test results showed that the introduced axial prestress allowed the restoration of the deformation under small lateral displacements, resulting in minor damage. However, there was no effect of the prestress on the self-centering capability when the plastic hinge region was damaged severely due to a large lateral displacement. judging from the observed damage, the design of the joints in precast piers should focus on the first joint between the foundation and the pier segment, for crack control. In order to satisfy the current required displacement ductility, it is necessary to have the same amount of transverse reinforcements as in reinforced concrete piers. As the steel ratio increases, the plastic deformation and its energy absorption capacity increase after reaching its maximum strength. The number of joints showed some influence on the energy absorption capacity. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据