Shear-Friction Strength of Low-Rise Walls with 550 MPa (80 ksi) Reinforcing Bars under Cyclic Loading

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cyclic Loading ◽  
Reinforcing Bars ◽  
Shear Friction

Cyclic Loading Test for Beam-Column Connections with 600 MPa (87 ksi) Beam Flexural Reinforcing Bars

2014 ◽  
Vol 111 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyeon-Jong Hwang ◽  
Hong-Gun Park ◽  
Won-Seok Choi ◽  
Lan Chung ◽  
Jin-Keun Kim
Keyword(s):  
Cyclic Loading ◽  
Reinforcing Bars ◽  
Loading Test ◽  
Cyclic Loading Test

Shear-Friction Strength of Low-Rise Walls with 600 MPa (87 ksi) Reinforcing Bars

2019 ◽  
Vol 117 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jang-Woon Baek ◽  
Sung-Hyun Kim ◽  
Hong-Gun Park ◽  
Byung-Soo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcing Bars ◽  
Shear Friction

Effect of edge distance on shear friction capacity of steel plates anchored with reinforcing bars in comparison with headed bolts

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 742-758
Author(s):  
Tarek S. Sabra ◽  
Hatem Hassan Ibrahim
Keyword(s):  
Steel Plate ◽  
Shear Capacity ◽  
Steel Plates ◽  
Experimental Program ◽  
Reinforcing Bars ◽  
Reinforcing Bar ◽  
Edge Distance ◽  
Shear Friction ◽  
Design Values ◽  
Friction Capacity

The shear friction capacity calculated using clauses 11.6.4 to 11.6.10 in ACI 318-14 or clauses 11.5.1 to 11.5.6 in CSA-A23.3-14 do not take into consideration the effect of edge distance on the shear friction capacity. The main objectives of this research are to study the effect of edge distance on the shear friction capacity by means of a specifically designed experimental program, to determine the minimum edge distance to develop the shear friction capacity, and to derive an expression for reduction of shear friction capacity for edge distances less than the minimum edge distance. The study involved testing eight specimens. In four specimens, a steel plate was anchored using welded reinforcing steel bars, and in the other four specimens the steel plate was anchored using headed concrete anchors (bolts) (HCA). The steel plates were tested under shear load at edge distances of 75, 150, 225, and 300 mm (3.0, 6.0, 9.0, and 12.0 in), for the two types of anchorage. The results were compared to design values according to ACI 318-14 and CAN/CSA-A23.3-14 standards. An equation is derived to compute the minimum edge distance after which the full shear friction capacity is developed. Another equation is derived to compute the proposed shear capacity for reinforcing bar anchors for edge distances less than the minimum edge distance.

Cyclic Loading Test for Walls of Aspect Ratio 1.0 and 0.5 with Grade 550 MPa Shear Reinforcing Bars

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jang-Woon Baek ◽  
Hong-Gun Park ◽  
Jae-Hoon Lee ◽  
Chang-Joon Bang
Keyword(s):  
Cyclic Loading ◽  
Aspect Ratio ◽  
Reinforcing Bars ◽  
Loading Test ◽  
Cyclic Loading Test

SEISMIC ENHANCEMENT OF REINFORCED-CONCRETE COLUMNS BY REBAR-RESTRAINING COLLARS

2012 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
pp. 1250015 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANAT RUANGRASSAMEE ◽  
ARCHAWIN SAWAROJ
Keyword(s):  
Reinforced Concrete ◽  
Cyclic Loading ◽  
Concrete Columns ◽  
Bridge Columns ◽  
Concrete Bridge ◽  
Reinforcing Bars ◽  
Plastic Hinges ◽  
Reinforced Concrete Bridge ◽  
Loading Tests ◽  
Cyclic Loading Tests

When reinforced-concrete columns are subjected to lateral cyclic loading, columns usually suffer failures at plastic hinges. If the buckling of longitudinal reinforcements at plastic hinges can be prevented or delayed, columns are expected to carry gravity loads at a higher ductility level. In this study, the rebar-restraining collar (RRC) was developed to improve the post-buckling behavior of longitudinal reinforcements. The behavior was investigated under monotonic loading tests of reinforcing bars with the RRCs and the cyclic loading tests of two reinforced-concrete bridge columns with and without RRCs. From the monotonic loading test, it was found that the RRCs significantly improved the post-yielding behavior of longitudinal reinforcing bars. The ductility and energy dissipation of longitudinal reinforcing bars with RRCs was significantly higher than that of the bare bar. Then, cyclic loading tests of two reinforced-concrete bridge columns were conducted. The cross section of columns was 0.4 m × 0.4 m, and the effective height was 2.15 m. The ratio of longitudinal reinforcing bars was 0.0123, and the volumetric ratio of transverse reinforcement was 0.00424. The column with RRCs did not have buckling of longitudinal reinforcements and had the ductility enhancement of about 17%, comparing to the column without RRCs. One evident benefit of using the RRCs is to control damage at plastic hinges of columns. Hence, the repair cost of columns after an earthquake can be reduced.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document