Extending The Collapse Time of Non-Engineered Masonry Buildings Under Seismic Loading

EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20
EXTENDING THE COLLAPSE TIME OF NON-ENGINEERED MASONRY BUILDINGS UNDER SEISMIC LOADING
J. Macabuag and S. Bhattacharya
Graduate Structural Engineer, Edge Structures Ltd, London (previously MEng Student, University of Oxford),
2
University Lecturer, University of Bristol, (previously University of Oxford)
Email: josh.macabuag@edgestructures.com, S.Bhattacharya@bristol.ac.uk
ABSTRACT : THE COLLAPSE OF NON-ENGINEERED MASONRY IS ONE OF THE GREATEST CAUSES OF DEATH IN MAJOR EARTHQUAKE EVENTS AROUND THE WORLD. THIS PAPER INVESTIGATES A RECENTLY DEVELOPED RETROFITTING TECHNOLOGY SPECIFICALLY AIMED AT PREVENTING OR PROLONGING THE COLLAPSE OF ADOBE (MUD BRICK) BUILDINGS UNDER STRONG EARTHQUAKES. THIS TECHNOLOGY USES COMMON POLYPROPYLENE PACKAGING STRAPS TO FORM A MESH, WHICH IS THEN USED TO PREVENT BRITTLE MASONRY COLLAPSE. THE RETROFITTING TECHNIQUE IS TESTED USING STATIC, DIAGONAL LOADING OF MODEL WALL PANELS. IT IS SHOWN THAT THE PROPOSED TECHNIQUE EFFECTIVELY PREVENTS BRITTLE COLLAPSE OF THE PANEL AND THE LOSS OF DEBRIS. PARTIAL MESHES OF VARIOUS ORIENTATIONS ARE ALSO INVESTIGATED IN ORDER TO BETTER IDENTIFY THE ACTION OF THE MESH. FINALLY, AN IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT IS PRESENTED, INVOLVING A TRAINING PROGRAMME FOR RURAL MASONS IN NEPAL AND A PUBLIC SHAKE-TABLE DEMONSTRATION.
Community of Practice: habitat Author: Josh Macabuag Institution: Edge Structures Ltd, London (previously MEng Student, University of Oxford) Previously published: 14th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, Oct 08 The Structural Engineer: Vol. 86, Issue 07, Apr 08
EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Motivation For This Study The replacement of existing dwellings with earthquake-resistant houses is neither feasible nor, perhaps, desirable. It has been found more realistic to think, rather, in terms of low-cost upgrading of traditional structures, with the aim of limiting damage caused by normal earthquakes and giving their occupants a good chance of escape in the once-in-a-lifetime event of a large earthquake. [Coburn and Spence] The great majority of all earthquake fatalities result from building failures with a growing disparity between vulnerability of those in developing and developed countries [GHI]. The greatest risk is by far presented to inhabitants of nonengineered masonry structures as demonstrated in the 2003 Bam (Iran) earthquake, where many of the thousands of deaths were attributable to vulnerable adobe (mud brick) structures. Similarly vulnerable, non-engineered masonry is widespread throughout the developing world and replacement of all such dwellings is both infeasible and undesirable, given that they are often the embodiment of local culture and tradition. Therefore, it is often more feasible to consider low-cost retrofitting of such buildings.
1.2. Masonry Collapse Structural collapse under seismic loading displays many possible failure mechanisms often related to interaction between structural components (e.g. separation of walls or floor-wall connections). When considering the failure of individual walls, the inertia forces induced by seismic action can act out-of-plane (e.g. causing toppling) or in-plane (e.g. diagonal shear cracks, often from the corners and openings). In-plane failure is a fundamental failure mode for unreinforced masonry and determination of wall shear strength is necessary for defining its resistance to this mode of failure. For shear failures, the shear strength [f] of plain masonry walls is given by the frictional relationship presented in equation 1.1 [EC6, BS1052-3].
f =o + N
(1.1)
f = failure shear strength, o = shear strength under zero compressive stress, = coefficient of friction.
EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20 1.3. Currently Available Retrofitting Techniques for Non-Engineered Masonry Methods required to meet the needs of the large populations in danger of nonengineered masonry collapse must be simple and inexpensive to match the available resources and skills [Mayorca]. Notable low-cost retrofitting techniques suitable for non-engineered, unreinforced masonry dwellings are given in Table 1. Method Polypropylene (PP) Meshing Developing Institute Description
Institute of Industrial Encasing masonry walls with a Science (IIS), mesh constructed of polypropylene Tokyo University, Japan strapping used for packaging worldwide [Mayorca]
Pontificia Universidad Similar to pp-meshing, but using a Catlica del Peru, Peru steel wire mesh [Blondet] External Vertical Sydney University, Australia External vertical bamboo Bamboo reinforcement [Dowling] Reinforcement TABLE 4: EXISTING RETROFITTING TECHNIQUES FOR UNREINFORCED MASONRY IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD Wire Meshing
This paper focuses on the technique of polypropylene (pp) meshing. PP-meshing was first formally proposed in 2003 [Mayorca], is still under active research and currently has application in Nepal, Pakistan and Kathmandu. Figure 1 shows a retrofitted house in Pakistan.
FIGURE 1: RETROFITTED HOUSE IN PAKISTAN BEFORE AND AFTER APPLICATION OF COVERING MORTAR LAYER6
Photos have been provided by Meguro Lab, Institute of Industrial Science, Tokyo University, Japan
EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20 1.4. Objectives This paper is concerned with investigating a method for prolonging the collapse life of non-engineered masonry under seismic loading, using polypropylene meshing. Validation of a proposed method requires extensive testing under various conditions. As masonry is one of the worlds oldest building materials, a vast number of masonry types have evolved. Therefore, full-scale testing of all available masonry types is infeasible and so efficient modelling techniques are required. Therefore, this paper aims to: investigate the effectiveness of pp-meshing in preventing brittle failure of unreinforced masonry specimens, under in-plane loading, investigate the scaling issues associated with small-scale modelling of the ppmesh, identify the precise action of the mesh in more detail, present the implementation of pp-meshing in a seismically active region of Nepal.
2. DIAGONAL COMPRESSION OF FULL AND SMALL-SCALE MASONRY Small-scale modelling was conducted at a linear scale of 1:4 as shown in figure 4. Determination of masonry shear resistance [f] to in-plane lateral load was achieved by testing both retrofitted and non-retrofitted square prisms in compression along one diagonal (figure 2). There is as yet no British or European standard for determining panel shear-resistance, and so the American Standard has been followed [ASTM E 519-02]. Two full-scale walls and three small-scale models were constructed for nonretrofitted testing under diagonal compression. For retrofitted testing two fullscale walls were constructed (parallel band spacing: 60mm) and nine small-scale models (band spacing: 15mm). Three of the small-scale retrofitted models shared the same mortar with the non-retrofitted specimens. In addition to fully retrofitted masonry panels, meshes of various types were also tested to further isolate and understand the action of the mesh (figures 6e & f). To achieve this, the remaining small-scale specimens were tested in two batches of three with both batches using a different mortar and consisting of one fully retrofitted specimen, one with only horizontal reinforcement (parallel to the mortar bed joint) and one with only vertical (perpendicular). Standard packaging strapping was used, and fastened with clips provided by the band manufacturers. Note that the clips used do not represent the method used in practice for applying the mesh. The aim of this test was to examine the effect of the pp-mesh on masonry failure and so recreating the installation method was not a requirement.
650mm 150mm
A: FULL SIZE BRICK WITH B: FULL-SCALE C: SMALL-SCALE SIZE BRICK USED FOR SMALL- WALL PANEL WALL PANEL SCALE TESTING
d: Full-scale retrofitted wall e: Small-scale fully retrofitted specimen7 panel Figure 2: Full and small-scale models ready for testing
2.1. Similitude of Model Mortar & Mesh In order for a small-scale model to accurately represent full-scale behaviour, the model and prototype should present the same stress-strain profiles when subjected to equivalent loading types [Harris and Sabnis]. Thus for the full and small-scale models to be similar the failure stresses [f] and failure strains [f] must be equal.
7
The ruler shown in figure 4e is a 30cm metal rule.
In the diagonal compression test the mortar bed is to be orientated at 45 to the horizontal, and so the stresses in the mortar may be approximated (in the proximity of the applied force [P]) as in figure 5:
N F
= N =
A = contact area
Figure 3: Diagonal compression test variables where, P = diagonally applied load as shown in figure 2 N = normal stress component of applied load (P) A = contact area between brick courses
P A 2
(2.1)
Therefore, substituting these stresses (equation 2.1) into the definition of shear failure (equation 1.1) and making the initial assumption that brick surface friction and mortar aggregate size will be controlled such that the coefficient of friction will be comparable for large and small-scale models ( = const), gives the condition: mo = po (2.2)
Equation 2.2 shows that in order to obtain identical stress-strain curves for diagonal shear test specimens of different scales, identical mortar strength must be ensured. Note that for dynamic testing this analysis no longer applies. It must be noted that both mesh and masonry must be scaled equally to satisfy similitude. As the small-scale models used in these tests are at a linear scale of , then the cross-sectional area of the pp-bands must be reduced by a factor of 16. Much of the previous small-scale testing of pp-meshing has used meshes of different scales to the masonry due to difficulties in producing bands of the required cross-section. To recreate this discrepancy -width bands were used for the small-scale testing discussed in this paper to investigate how well meshes of this scale describe full-size behaviour.
EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION All failures of full and small-scale non-retrofitted walls were brittle with no further load being maintained whereas retrofitted models continued to carry load after initial failure (figure 3). Example specimen failure loads are given in figure 4.
a: Full-scale specimen b: Small-scale c: Full-scale specimen after at brittle failure specimen at brittle testing. Note displacement and failure rotation of corner section
d: Continuing to maintain load after second band failure. Further cracking suggests redistribution of load
e: Intact sections suggest little redistribution of load. Total collapse observed after failure of the supporting band. Figure 4: Full and small-scale model failures
f: Load redistributing through specimen (shown by continued cracking) but little support offered by vertical bands. Note loss of debris.
3.1. Comparing Retrofitted and Non-Retrofitted Failure Non-retrofitted specimens displayed brittle failure and collapse whereas retrofitted specimens continued to maintain load after initial failure of the masonry (figure 4). There was also no significant loss of debris until several Community of Practice: habitat Author: Josh Macabuag Institution: Edge Structures Ltd, London (previously MEng Student, University of Oxford) Previously published: 14th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, Oct 08 The Structural Engineer: Vol. 86, Issue 07, Apr 08
EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20 bands were broken. During loading, the mesh acted to maintain panel integrity allowing the load to be redistributed throughout the mesh and masonry (shown by the formation of further cracks upon continued loading). Individual band failures showed that significant load was also carried by the mesh and it should be noted that all band failures occurred in horizontal bands at brick vertices. Figure 4 plots the comparative performances.
[P] Compressive Load (kN)
2.5
P
2 1.5
Fully Retrofitted Non-Retrofitted
0.5
0 0 10
[] Vertical Deformation (mm)
20
30
40
50
60
FIGURE 5: LOAD VS DISPLACEMENT FOR RETROFITTED AND NONRETROFITTED SMALL-SCALE MODEL
3.2. Comparing Mesh Orientation Horizontal and vertical retrofitting was investigated individually in order to isolate the effects of the mesh parallel and perpendicular to the mortar bed joint, respectively. These tests showed that the main effect of the mesh is to restrain separated sections of masonry allowing for redistribution of the load within the masonry itself. Vertical bands provide little direct resistance to lateral sliding but upon panel deformation, band tension acts perpendicular to the horizontal mortar joints allowing frictional effects between sliding rows to resist further collapse. However, the specimen shown in figure 4f highlights that the incomplete, vertical mesh was unable to prevent loss of material, so limiting the redistribution of load. Horizontal retrofitting is shown to resist the separation of bricks within the same row and so is effective when diagonal or vertical cracking has taken place. That horizontal bands directly resist the load can also be seen in the fact that all band failures occurred in horizontal bands.
3.3. Comparing Full and Small-Scale Failure Initial failure stress and pre-failure behaviour was unaffected by the presence of the pp-mesh due to the masonrys relative rigidity (figure 4). Therefore, preCommunity of Practice: habitat Author: Josh Macabuag Institution: Edge Structures Ltd, London (previously MEng Student, University of Oxford) Previously published: 14th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, Oct 08 The Structural Engineer: Vol. 86, Issue 07, Apr 08
EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20 failure data of retrofitted and non-retrofitted specimens may be compared. However, a comparison of full and small-scale retrofitted post-failure profiles reveals that the small-scale specimen is able to maintain a far greater ultimate load relative to its initial failure loads. This is to be expected given that the small-scale mesh used was not of the same linear scale. If post-failure behaviour were purely defined by the action of the mesh, then reducing (by a factor of four. i.e. to the scale of the mesh) the loaddisplacement curve for the small-scale specimen should lead to correlation with the full-scale curve. However, performing this adjustment gives non-dimensional loads below that of the full-scale specimen. This trend was shown by all tested specimens. This therefore highlights the fact that post-failure behaviour is a complex interaction of masonry and mesh and not solely due to mesh properties. Therefore, to simulate accurate quantitative post-failure behaviour, mesh and wall must be of the same linear scale. However, the observed retrofitted failure patterns are common to both full and small-scale specimens despite the lack of similitude. Therefore for the purposes of investigating qualitative mesh/masonry behaviour and interactions (e.g. for testing of different mesh types/orientations, pitches etc) it is not necessary that similitude of both the masonry and mesh be satisfied. 4. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED RETROFITTING TECHNIQUE To investigate the practical issues of implementation a pilot scheme is being conducted in a seismically active region of the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. The Himalayan region is an example of one area of constant seismic activity, high population density, and wide-spread use of unreinforced masonry built outside of current building standards. Given the high potential for future loss of life, several pp-band implementation programmes have been run in this region, by the Nepalese NGO, National Society for Earthquake Technology. Given that the dwellings most at risk are built outside of building regulations it is clear that a sustainable solution can only be achieved by raising local awareness of available methods and allowing the building owners and tradesman to themselves become the disseminators of the proposed solution. In 2006 a public, low-tech shake-table demonstration was held in Kashmir (following the 2005 earthquake) followed by the retrofit of a full-scale building. In 2007 an implementation project proposal was awarded the Mondialogo Engineering Award and granted funding. The Mondialogo scheme will took place in November 2008 as a partnership between Oxford University; the Institute of Industrial Science, Tokyo University; the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay; Nepal Engineering College and Khwopa Engineering College, Nepal and the National Society of Earthquake Technology Nepal. Community of Practice: habitat Author: Josh Macabuag Institution: Edge Structures Ltd, London (previously MEng Student, University of Oxford) Previously published: 14th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, Oct 08 The Structural Engineer: Vol. 86, Issue 07, Apr 08
EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20 The implementation project involved a six-day training course for local, rural masons, focusing on both earthquake construction and the pp-retrofitting technique. At the end of the course was a public low-tech shake-table demonstration of the pp-band technology, inviting the community, press and key individuals/institutions. The masons were engaged in several aspects of earthquake construction: appropriate site selection, planning and construction techniques (in masonry, timber and RC), strengthening and repairing of existing structures and retrofitting using the pp-mesh. The demonstration was designed to allow the masons to apply what they have learnt and allow the public to graphically witness the necessity to improve upon traditional building techniques and to safeguard existing buildings against collapse. The event received significant radio and television coverage in Nepal. A suitable adobe dwelling has been identified in the area and will soon be retrofitted by the masons trained in November, under the supervision of NSET. The technique is currently designed for single-storey adobe but research is currently being conducted at Tokyo & Bristol Universities to test its application up to 2-storeys and for stone masonry. A team of students at Bristol University, Tokyo University, IIT Bombay and Nepal Engineering College are currently working towards reentering the Mondialogo Engineering Awards for 2009. The charity Engineers Without Borders-UK are looking at sending volunteers to NSET for the second consecutive year and there are plans to visit a very similar programme running in Peru, to help adapt the technique further. In addition to further understanding the issues of implementation, the long-term aim is to extend this original training program and demonstration to other areas of high-risk throughout the Himalayan region, with the assistance of NSET, by further engaging municipalities and universities to support research and dissemination.
b: mock mesh reinforcement8
NB/ The aim of the pp-retrofit during the course was as a short introduction to forming the mesh and attaching to the wall. PP-band retrofitting is designed for adobe structures where holes can be more easily drilled through bricks, allowing finer spacing of through-wall connectors, giving a tighter mesh. Real retrofit is also continued around corners and connected to an RC band at ground level.
EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20 a: trainee masons building reinforced masonry model (about to prepare for 1st level of horizontal reinforcement)
c: trainee masons building model Figure 6: Seismic Construction training demonstration, Bhaktapur, Nepal 2008. 5. SUMMARY This paper has investigated the technique of polypropylene meshing for preventing or prolonging the collapse of adobe buildings under strong earthquakes. The behaviours of full-scale and small-scale models have been compared to identify scaling issues of modelling retrofitted specimens. Various mesh types have also been tested to investigate the action of the mesh. Finally, a pilot scheme for pp-mesh implementation in rural Nepal has been introduced. The main findings of this paper are summarised as follows: Non-retrofitted walls showed sudden brittle failure and were unable to maintain further load. It is this brittle failure that poses significant danger to building occupants during earthquakes. Retrofitting masonry walls with polypropylene meshing allowed specimens to maintain load after initial failure of the masonry and prevented the loss of debris, even after the failure of several straps. Given the low cost, high availability and relative simplicity of the pp-meshing technique, this technology may potentially be used to prevent/delay brittle collapse of nonengineered structures under seismic loading. Separating the effect of horizontal and vertical reinforcement showed that: o Vertical bands apply normal compression once sliding of rows occurs, increasing the masonrys frictional resistance to shear sliding. o Horizontal bands directly bear load by resisting the separation of bricks within the same row. Band failure occurred in horizontal bands at brick vertices. This suggests that further investigation should be focused on reducing the stress concentrations experienced at masonry corners. Small-scale retrofitted models gave good qualitative indication of full-scale behaviour even where similitude between the mesh and wall was not maintained. However, quantitative assumptions of full-scale behaviour cannot be obtained from small-scale testing if mesh and wall are not of the same scale. Community of Practice: habitat Author: Josh Macabuag Institution: Edge Structures Ltd, London (previously MEng Student, University of Oxford) Previously published: 14th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, Oct 08 The Structural Engineer: Vol. 86, Issue 07, Apr 08 course and public
An implementation project trained rural masons outside Kathmandu, Nepal in earthquake construction and retrofitting and conducted a public, low-tech shake-table. A full-scale retrofit will be taking place near Kathmandu shortly and further work is being conducted by students at Bristol University, Tokyo University, IIT Bombay, Nepal Engineering College and the National Society of Earthquake Engineering Nepal.
REFERENCES Blondet, M., G. Villa Garcia, and S. Brzev (2003), Earthquake-resistant construction of adobe buildings: A tutorial. EERI/IAEE World Housing Encyclopedia. Coburn A., Spence R. (2002), Earthquake Protection (2nd edition), John Wiley & Sons Inc. Dowling, D.M., and Samali, B. (2006), Low-cost, low-tech means of improving the earthquake resistance of adobe-mudbrick houses, Proceedings of the International Conference on Earthquake Engineering (ICEE 2006), Lahore, Pakistan. GeoHazards International, Global Earthquake Safety Initiative Pilot Project, United Nations Centre for Regional Development (2001). Harris, H.G. and G.M. Sabnis (1999), Structural modeling and experimental techniques. CRC Press. Mayorca, P. (2003), Strengthening of Unreinforced Masonry Structures in Earthquake Prone Regions, Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Tokyo, Japan.
A Critical Review of Retrofitting Methods for Unreinforced Masonry Structures By Andrew Smith & Thomas Redman
Section 1: Introduction The consequences of earthquakes can be devastating to human lives, as shown in Table 1.1, which lists the casualties from past earthquakes. Year Location 1908 Messina (Italy) 1920 Gansu (China) 1923 Kanto (Japan) 1927 Qinghai (China) 1932 Gansu (China) 1948 Ashgabat (Turkmenistan) 1970 Peru 1976 Tangshan (China) 2001 Gujarat (India) 2003 Bam (Iran) 2004 Sumatra (Indonesia) 2005 Kashmir (Pakistan) 2008 Sichuan (China) Total death toll: 1,556,197 Population of the City of Prague, Casualties 70,000 to 100,000 200,000 143,000 200,000 70,000 110,000 66,000 255,000 20,000 30,000 220,000 73,000 69,197 Czech Republic: 1,212,097 [Czech
TABLE 1.1: EARTHQUAKES CAUSING THE GREATEST NUMBER OF CASUALTIES IN THE LAST 100 YEARS (BHATTACHARYA, 2007)
This review seeks to collate information on and categorise the various types of retrofitting methods for unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings under research or early implementation, and critically compare them to help further understand which methods are most suitable for further research or application in developing countries. This work is a continuation of the international, Mondialago Award-winning project, Improving the Structural Strength under Seismic Loading of Non-Engineered Buildings in the Himalayan Region and will build upon the work carried out to date. Section 2: Types of Buildings Vulnerable to Collapse during Earthquakes 2.1. Introduction
URM buildings can be broadly arranged into three common categories: adobe, brick and stone masonry. Although cheap and easy to build, all URM buildings have been observed to be susceptible to earthquakes.
Community of Practice: Habitat Author: Andrew Smith & Thomas Redman Institution: University of Bristol
2.2.
Adobe Buildings
The popularity of adobe buildings is illustrated by the high proportion of housing present in Latin America, Africa, India, Asia, the Middle East and Southern Europe. Indeed, 30% of the worlds population lives in adobe dwellings, which accounts for 20% of the worlds urban/suburban population, Blondet (2003). However, adobe structures are highly prone to collapse during earthquakes causing considerable damage and loss of lives, as shown in table 2.1. Earthquake Fatalities Adobe Buildings damaged or People effected collapsed 150,000 1.6 million 25,000 85% of infrastructure destroyed 100,000 homeless left
El Salvador, 1,100 2001 Southern Peru, 81 2001 Iran, 2003 26,000
TABLE 5.1: EFFECTS OF EARTHQUAKES ON ADOBE BUILDINGS [BASED ON INFORMATION FROM BLONDET (2003) & BAM PRELIMINARY EARTHQUAKE REPORT, LINK: HTTP://EARTHQUAKE.USGS.GOV/EQCENTER/EQINTHENEWS/2003/USCVAD/]
2.3.
Brick Masonry Buildings
Brick masonry housing is also vulnerable to collapse under seismic loading; the 1976 earthquake in China caused the loss of approximately 240,000 lives, mainly owing to the collapse of brick masonry structures. 2.4. Stone Masonry Buildings
Stone masonry buildings tend to perform poorly in earthquakes owing to the low strength of the stone and mortar used and the lack of adequate wall connections. The quality of local construction is often very low due to the lack of skilled engineers involved. For example, in Nepal, over 98 % of buildings are constructed by the owners following the advice of local craftsmen, Meguro et al, (2005). Section 3: Common Failure Mechanisms of URMs 3.1. Introduction
From past earthquakes, the buildings discussed in section 2 have been observed to demonstrate common failure mechanisms. 3.2. Adobe Buildings
Community of Practice: Habitat Author: Andrew Smith & Thomas Redman Institution: University of Bristol

Extending The Collapse Time of Non-Engineered Masonry Buildings Under Seismic Loading

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Extending The Collapse Time of Non-Engineered Masonry Buildings Under Seismic Loading

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EWB-UK Research Conference 2009 Hosted by The Royal Academy of Engineering February 20

J. Macabuag and S. Bhattacharya

University Lecturer, University of Bristol, (previously University of Oxford)

Email: josh.macabuag@edgestructures.com, S.Bhattacharya@bristol.ac.uk

The ruler shown in figure 4e is a 30cm metal rule.

[P] Compressive Load (kN)

Fully Retrofitted Non-Retrofitted

[] Vertical Deformation (mm)

FIGURE 5: LOAD VS DISPLACEMENT FOR RETROFITTED AND NONRETROFITTED SMALL-SCALE MODEL

b: mock mesh reinforcement8

El Salvador, 1,100 2001 Southern Peru, 81 2001 Iran, 2003 26,000

Brick Masonry Buildings

You might also like