Investigating Influencing Factors on the Ductility Capacity of a Fixed-Head Reinforced Concrete Pile in Homogeneous Clay

2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 489-498 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.-S. Chiou ◽  
Y.-C. Tsai ◽  
C.-H. Chen

AbstractThis study performs parametric analyses on the displacement ductility capacity of a fixed-head reinforced concrete pile in homogeneous clay, considering the spread of plasticity in the pile. The parametric study regards the pile as a limited ductility structure, which conditionally allows the pile to have inelastic response during large loading. The variables considered include the pile section parameters and p-y model parameters. A large number of pushover analyses are conducted to examine the displacement ductility capacity of the pile. The results show that the plastic hinging will occur at the pile head region for a fixed-head pile, and the displacement ductility capacity of the pile is mainly influenced by the over-strength ratio of the pile section. Furthermore, the second plastic region may occur in ground when the axial force is in high tension. Based on the design concept of limited ductility structures, the high tensile force in pile should be avoided in pile design. A quantitative relationship between the displacement ductility capacity and over-strength ratio is suggested for engineering applications.

2001 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 922-937 ◽  
Author(s):  
T Paulay

It is postulated that for purposes of seismic design, the ductile behaviour of lateral force-resisting wall components, elements, and indeed the entire system can be satisfactorily simulated by bilinear force–displacement modeling. This enables displacement relationships between the system and its constituent components at a particular limit state to be readily established. To this end, some widely used fallacies, relevant to the transition from the elastic to the plastic domain of behaviour, are exposed. A redefinition of stiffness and yield displacement allows more realistic predictions of the important feature of seismic response, component displacements, to be made. The concepts are rational, yet very simple. Their applications are interwoven with the designer's intentions. Contrary to current design practice, whereby a specific global displacement ductility capacity is prescribed for a particular structural class, the designer can determine the acceptable displacement demand to be imposed on the system. This should protect critical components against excessive displacements. Specific intended displacement demands and capacities of systems comprising reinforced concrete cantilever and coupled walls can be estimated.Key words: ductility, displacements, reinforced concrete, seismic design, stiffness, structural walls.


Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 1166
Author(s):  
Stanislav Strashnov ◽  
Sergei Alexandrov ◽  
Lihui Lang

The present paper provides a semianalytic solution for finite plane strain bending under tension of an incompressible elastic/plastic sheet using a material model that combines isotropic and kinematic hardening. A numerical treatment is only necessary to solve transcendental equations and evaluate ordinary integrals. An arbitrary function of the equivalent plastic strain controls isotropic hardening, and Prager’s law describes kinematic hardening. In general, the sheet consists of one elastic and two plastic regions. The solution is valid if the size of each plastic region increases. Parameters involved in the constitutive equations determine which of the plastic regions reaches its maximum size. The thickness of the elastic region is quite narrow when the present solution breaks down. Elastic unloading is also considered. A numerical example illustrates the general solution assuming that the tensile force is given, including pure bending as a particular case. This numerical solution demonstrates a significant effect of the parameter involved in Prager’s law on the bending moment and the distribution of stresses at loading, but a small effect on the distribution of residual stresses after unloading. This parameter also affects the range of validity of the solution that predicts purely elastic unloading.


2012 ◽  
Vol 174-177 ◽  
pp. 455-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao Wei Li ◽  
Xue Wei Li ◽  
Xin Yuan

For expedite the development of high titanium heavy slag concrete, eight high titanium heavy slag high strength reinforced concrete (HTHS-HSRC) scale model column are studied. The eight HTHS-HSRC model columns are tested under reversed horizontal force. Primary experimental parameters include axial load ratio varying from 0.3 to 0.5, volumetric ratios of transverse reinforcement ranging from 1.38% to 1.56%, strength of high titanium heavy slag high strength concrete varying from 55.9 to 61.6 N/mm2 and configurations of transverse reinforcement. It is found from the test result that HTHS-HSRC model columns provides comparable seismic performance to those usually used reinforced concrete column in terms of member ductility, hysteretic and energy dissipation capacity. Primary Factors of Displacement Ductility of Model Columns are also discussed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1042-1050
Author(s):  
R. W. SOARES ◽  
S. S. LIMA ◽  
S. H. C. SANTOS

Abstract The structural design under seismic loading has been for many years based on force methods to consider the effects of energy dissipation and elastoplastic behavior. Currently, displacement-based methods are being developed to take into account elastoplastic behavior. These methods use moment-curvature relationships to determine the ductility capacity of a structural element, which is the deformation capacity of the element before its collapse. The greater the plastic displacement or rotation a structural member can achieve before it collapses, the more energy it is capable of dissipating. This plastic displacement or rotation capacity of a member is known as the member ductility, which for reinforced concrete members is directly related to efficient concrete confinement. This study investigates at which extents transverse reinforcement detailing influences reinforced concrete column ductility. For this, a bridge located in Ecuador is modeled and analyzed, and its ductility evaluated considering several cases of axial loading and concrete confinement levels. After the performed displacement-based analyses, it is verified whether the response modification factor defined by AASHTO is adequate in the analyzed case.


2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toong Khuan Chan ◽  
Chee Keong Poh

2013 ◽  
Vol 470 ◽  
pp. 958-961
Author(s):  
Yeun Seung Lee ◽  
Jin Tak Oh ◽  
Young Sik Kim ◽  
Young K. Ju

To overcome disadvantages of usual Cast-In-Place (CIP) concrete pile methods in top-down construction, some prototypes of a joint of the PHC pile to column that directly connects a column to a PHC pile are analytically studied. With the consideration of strength requirement and stress concentration of joint of the PHC pile to column, we suggest the most appropriate one.


2003 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 863-895 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie M. Megget

The seismic performance of eleven half-scale and three full-sized reinforced concrete beam-column knee joints was tested under inelastic cyclic loading. Twelve joints were designed to the current New Zealand Concrete Standard, NZS 3101 while the remaining two were designed to the 1964 New Zealand Code, which contained few seismic provisions. All the 1995 designs approached or exceeded their nominal beam strengths in both directions and only degraded in strength at displacement ductility factors greater than 2, while the 1960 designs failed prematurely in joint shear at about 70% of the beam nominal strengths. Many of the half-scale joints failed when cover concrete split off in the joint zone, allowing loss of anchorage and slip of the top beam bars. Two full-scale joints were designed to carry the maximum specified code joint shear stress (0.2 fc′), and one subsequently failed due to joint shear when the concrete compressive strength did not reach the specified design value. A third full-size joint was tested with distributed beam reinforcement. This joint performed in a ductile manner to displacement ductility 4 but failed in the second cycle at that displacement, due to buckling of several rows of beam bars.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document