A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Seismic Rehabilitation—Benefits of Component Testing
FEMA 356 backbone relations tend to provide conservative estimates of the available strengths and deformation capacities of reinforced concrete components, leading to costly seismic rehabilitation solutions for California hospitals. The conservatism is driven by the lack of test data for older, typically poorly detailed, structural components. Although FEMA 356 does provide for building specific component testing, this approach is not common due to cost concerns and/or schedule constraints. However, a test program on lightly-reinforced, poorly-detailed wall segments was undertaken at UCLA in 2004–2005 to support seismic rehabilitation projects on several southern California hospitals. Presented test results are compared with FEMA 356 backbone relations to highlight the advantages associated with building-specific test programs. In general, the test specimens revealed more strength and deformation capacity than assumed by FEMA 356, and more gradual strength deterioration. The test results, when coupled with the FEMA 356 Nonlinear Static Procedure (NSP) and Nonlinear Dynamic Procedure (NDP), enabled the development of more rational and substantially more economical rehabilitation solutions. The test results were used to help develop new backbone relations that were incorporated into ASCE-41-06 Supplement #1.
Seismic Rehabilitation—Benefits of Component Testing
FEMA 356 backbone relations tend to provide conservative estimates of the available strengths and deformation capacities of reinforced concrete components, leading to costly seismic rehabilitation solutions for California hospitals. The conservatism is driven by the lack of test data for older, typically poorly detailed, structural components. Although FEMA 356 does provide for building specific component testing, this approach is not common due to cost concerns and/or schedule constraints. However, a test program on lightly-reinforced, poorly-detailed wall segments was undertaken at UCLA in 2004–2005 to support seismic rehabilitation projects on several southern California hospitals. Presented test results are compared with FEMA 356 backbone relations to highlight the advantages associated with building-specific test programs. In general, the test specimens revealed more strength and deformation capacity than assumed by FEMA 356, and more gradual strength deterioration. The test results, when coupled with the FEMA 356 Nonlinear Static Procedure (NSP) and Nonlinear Dynamic Procedure (NDP), enabled the development of more rational and substantially more economical rehabilitation solutions. The test results were used to help develop new backbone relations that were incorporated into ASCE-41-06 Supplement #1.
Seismic Rehabilitation—Benefits of Component Testing
Massone, Leonardo (author) / Orakcal, Kutay (author) / Wallace, John (author)
ATC and SEI Conference on Improving the Seismic Performance of Existing Buildings and Other Structures ; 2009 ; San Francisco, California, United States
2009-12-07
Conference paper
Electronic Resource
English
Seismic Rehabilitation - Benefits of Component Testing
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2007
Seismic Rehabilitation-Benefits of Component Testing
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2009
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2006
The wider benefits of rehabilitation
Online Contents | 1993