Experimental investigation on reparability of an infilled rocking wall frame structure

Summary Improving seismic performance is one of the critical objectives in earthquake engineering. With the development of economy and society, reparability and fast resilience of a structure are becoming increasingly important. Reinforced concrete (RC) frame structure is prone to soft story mechanism. As a result, deformation and damage are so concentrated that reparability is severely hampered. Rocking wall provides an available approach for deformation control in RC frame by introducing a continuous component along the height. Previous researches mostly focus on seismic responses of rocking wall frame structures, while damage mode and reparability have not been investigated in detail. In this study, a novel infilled rocking wall frame (IRWF) structure is proposed. A half-scaled IRWF model was designed according to Chinese seismic design code. The model was subjected to cyclic pushover testing up to structure drift ratio of 1/50 (amplitude 1/50), and its reparability was evaluated thereafter. Retrofit was implemented by wrapping steel plates and installing friction dampers. The retrofitted model was further loaded up to amplitude 1/30. The IRWF model showed excellent reparability and satisfactory seismic performance on deformation control, damage mode, hysteresis behavior, and beam-to-column joint rotation. After retrofitting, capacity of the model was improved by 11% with limited crack distribution. The model did not degrade until amplitude 1/30, due to shear failure in frame beams. The retrofit procedure was proved effective, and reparability of the IRWF model was demonstrated. Seismic resilience tends to be achieved in the proposed system.

[1]  Jonathan P. Stewart,et al.  Evaluation of the seismic performance of a code‐conforming reinforced‐concrete frame building—from seismic hazard to collapse safety and economic losses , 2007 .

[2]  Richard Sause,et al.  Experimental Evaluation of Earthquake Resistant Posttensioned Steel Connections , 2002 .

[3]  In-Rak Choi,et al.  Framed Steel Plate Wall Behavior under Cyclic Lateral Loading , 2007 .

[4]  Edén Bojórquez,et al.  Residual drift demands in moment‐resisting steel frames subjected to narrow‐band earthquake ground motions , 2013 .

[5]  Sri Sritharan,et al.  Performance-based seismic evaluation of two five-story precast concrete hybrid frame buildings , 2007 .

[6]  Alessandro Palermo,et al.  Quasi‐static and pseudo‐dynamic testing of unbonded post‐tensioned rocking bridge piers with external replaceable dissipaters , 2009 .

[7]  Kailai Deng,et al.  Force-displacement mixed control for collapse tests of multistory buildings using quasi-static loading systems , 2014 .

[8]  Yoshihiro Kimura,et al.  Effect of Column Stiffness on Braced Frame Seismic Behavior , 2004 .

[9]  H. Zibaei,et al.  Evaluation of seismic behavior improvement in RC MRFs retrofitted by controlled rocking wall systems , 2014 .

[10]  George W. Housner,et al.  The response of veterans hospital building 41 in the San Fernando earthquake , 1982 .

[11]  G. Housner The behavior of inverted pendulum structures during earthquakes , 1963 .

[12]  Matthew R. Eatherton,et al.  Hybrid simulation testing of a self‐centering rocking steel braced frame system , 2014 .

[13]  Akira Wada,et al.  Shaking table tests on seismic response of steel braced frames with column uplift , 2006 .

[14]  José I. Restrepo,et al.  Seismic performance of self-centering structural walls incorporating energy dissipators , 2007 .

[15]  Shoichi Kishiki,et al.  Pin‐supported walls for enhancing the seismic performance of building structures , 2012 .

[16]  Michel Bruneau,et al.  A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities , 2003 .

[17]  Curt B. Haselton,et al.  Seismic Collapse Safety of Reinforced Concrete Buildings. I: Assessment of Ductile Moment Frames , 2011 .

[18]  John B. Mander,et al.  Seismic Performance of Precast Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Walls , 2003 .