Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading
A three-story single-unit tunnel form building (TFB) was designed using a non-seismic code of practice (BS 8110). Two one-third scale test models were constructed and tested under in-plane lateral cyclic loading and out-of-plane lateral cyclic loading, respectively. The specimens were tested at ±0.0...
Published in: | Journal of Engineering and Technological Sciences |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Institute for Research and Community Services, Institut Teknologi Bandung
2018
|
Online Access: | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85051624618&doi=10.5614%2f2Fj.eng.technol.sci.2018.50.2.5&partnerID=40&md5=8f6cc57123f2fdc01a409a7bb73eb67d |
id |
Hamid N.H.A.; Anuar S.; Awang H.; Effendi M.K. |
---|---|
spelling |
Hamid N.H.A.; Anuar S.; Awang H.; Effendi M.K. 2-s2.0-85051624618 Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading 2018 Journal of Engineering and Technological Sciences 50 2 10.5614/2Fj.eng.technol.sci.2018.50.2.5 https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85051624618&doi=10.5614%2f2Fj.eng.technol.sci.2018.50.2.5&partnerID=40&md5=8f6cc57123f2fdc01a409a7bb73eb67d A three-story single-unit tunnel form building (TFB) was designed using a non-seismic code of practice (BS 8110). Two one-third scale test models were constructed and tested under in-plane lateral cyclic loading and out-of-plane lateral cyclic loading, respectively. The specimens were tested at ±0.01%, ±0.1%, ±0.25%, ±0.5%, ±0.75%, ±1.0%, ±1.25%, ±1.5%, ±1.75% ±1.8, ±1.9% and ±2% drifts, after which severe cracks were observed on the wall-slab joints and wall panels. Subsequently, the damaged specimens were repaired and retrofitted by wrapping carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) around the damaged walls and affixing steel plates and steel angles at the wall-slab joints using several different repair and retrofitting schemes. The repaired specimens were retested using the same drifts. The comparison of the seismic behavior between unrepaired and repaired specimens was made based on visual observation of damage, hysteresis loops, lateral strength capacity, stiffness, ductility, and equivalent viscous damping. The experimental results showed that the repaired specimens were improved in terms of damage, lateral strength capacity, stiffness, ductility, and equivalent viscous damping. It is recommended to strengthen and rehabilitate tunnel form buildings after an earthquake using CFRP, additional shear walls, steel plates and steel angles. ©2018 Published by ITB Journal Publisher. Institute for Research and Community Services, Institut Teknologi Bandung 23375779 English Article |
author |
2-s2.0-85051624618 |
spellingShingle |
2-s2.0-85051624618 Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading |
author_facet |
2-s2.0-85051624618 |
author_sort |
2-s2.0-85051624618 |
title |
Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading |
title_short |
Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading |
title_full |
Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading |
title_fullStr |
Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading |
title_full_unstemmed |
Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading |
title_sort |
Seismic behavior of tunnel form building under lateral cyclic loading |
publishDate |
2018 |
container_title |
Journal of Engineering and Technological Sciences |
container_volume |
50 |
container_issue |
2 |
doi_str_mv |
10.5614/2Fj.eng.technol.sci.2018.50.2.5 |
url |
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85051624618&doi=10.5614%2f2Fj.eng.technol.sci.2018.50.2.5&partnerID=40&md5=8f6cc57123f2fdc01a409a7bb73eb67d |
description |
A three-story single-unit tunnel form building (TFB) was designed using a non-seismic code of practice (BS 8110). Two one-third scale test models were constructed and tested under in-plane lateral cyclic loading and out-of-plane lateral cyclic loading, respectively. The specimens were tested at ±0.01%, ±0.1%, ±0.25%, ±0.5%, ±0.75%, ±1.0%, ±1.25%, ±1.5%, ±1.75% ±1.8, ±1.9% and ±2% drifts, after which severe cracks were observed on the wall-slab joints and wall panels. Subsequently, the damaged specimens were repaired and retrofitted by wrapping carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) around the damaged walls and affixing steel plates and steel angles at the wall-slab joints using several different repair and retrofitting schemes. The repaired specimens were retested using the same drifts. The comparison of the seismic behavior between unrepaired and repaired specimens was made based on visual observation of damage, hysteresis loops, lateral strength capacity, stiffness, ductility, and equivalent viscous damping. The experimental results showed that the repaired specimens were improved in terms of damage, lateral strength capacity, stiffness, ductility, and equivalent viscous damping. It is recommended to strengthen and rehabilitate tunnel form buildings after an earthquake using CFRP, additional shear walls, steel plates and steel angles. ©2018 Published by ITB Journal Publisher. |
publisher |
Institute for Research and Community Services, Institut Teknologi Bandung |
issn |
23375779 |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
accesstype |
|
record_format |
scopus |
collection |
Scopus |
_version_ |
1828987878982549504 |