Advertisement

Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 1053–1073 | Cite as

Application of new material testing integrated (MTI) simulation paradigm for studying concrete confinement

  • Donghyuk Jung
  • Bassem AndrawesEmail author
Original Research
  • 88 Downloads

Abstract

This paper presents a new experimental–numerical simulation framework for investigating the impacts of unconventional material behaviors on the global response of structural systems. The new framework is specifically designed to address: (1) knowledge gaps related to the lack of analytical tools for predicting the behavior of materials under nontraditional loading environments, and (2) high costs associated with large-scale experimental testing. The new simulation method, named material testing integrated (MTI) simulation, incorporates physical material test data into numerical simulation of structural system or component to provide more accurate structural performance evaluation based on reliable constitutive behavior of materials. To demonstrate the new concept, this paper utilizes MTI simulation to study and compare the seismic response of reinforced concrete (RC) bridge columns rehabilitated with steel and shape memory alloy spiral reinforcement. The experimental-based MTI simulation responses of the columns are compared with that of conventional numerical simulation. The results show that the test data utilized in the MTI simulation are well reflected in the global seismic response of the RC columns.

Keywords

Bridge columns Confinement Seismic Numerical simulation Material testing Hybrid simulation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) through its Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) program under Award No. 1055640, and the authors are grateful for the support.

References

  1. Abbiati G, Bursi OS, Caperan P, Di Sarno L, Molina FJ, Paolacci F, Pegon P (2015) Hybrid simulation of a multi-span RC viaduct with plain bars and sliding bearings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 44:2221–2240.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2580 Google Scholar
  2. American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO) (1969) Standard specifications for highway bridges, 10th edn. Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrawes B, Shin M (2008) Seismic retrofit of bridge columns using innovative wrapping technique. In: Proceedings of structures congress, Vancouver, Canada.  https://doi.org/10.1061/41016(314)40
  4. Braga F, Gigliotti R, Laterza M, D’Amato M, Kunnath S (2012) Modified steel bar model incorporating bond-slip for seismic assessment of concrete structures. J Struct Eng 138:1342–1350.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000587 Google Scholar
  5. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) (2013) Seismic design criteria, Version 1.7, SacramentoGoogle Scholar
  6. Chang GA, Mander JB (1994) Seismic energy based fatigue damage analysis of bridge columns: Part 1-Evaluation of seismic capacity. NCEER Technical Report No. NCEER-94-0006 State University of New York, BuffaloGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen Q (2015) Experimental testing and constitutive modeling of concrete confined with shape memory alloys. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen Q, Andrawes B (2014a) Monotonic and cyclic experimental testing of concrete confined with shape memory alloy spirals. In: Proceedings of the 10th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Anchorage, AlaskaGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen Q, Andrawes B (2014b). Experimentally validated modeling of concrete actively confined using SMA reinforcement. In: Proceedings of the 10th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Anchorage, AlaskaGoogle Scholar
  10. Frankie T, Abdelnaby A, Silva P, Sanders D, Elnashai A, Spencer BF, Kuchma D, Chang CM (2013) Hybrid simulation of curved four-span bridge: comparison of numerical and hybrid experimental/analytical results and methods of numerical model calibration. In: Proceedings of structures congress, Pittsburgh.  https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784412848.064
  11. Giuffrè A, Pinto PE (1970) Reinforced concrete behavior under strong repeated loadings. Giornale del Genio Civile 5:391–408Google Scholar
  12. Karsan ID, Jirsa JO (1969) Behavior of concrete under compressive loadings. J Struct Div ASCE 95:2543–2563Google Scholar
  13. Kent DC, Park R (1971) Flexural members with confined concrete. J Struct Div ASCE 97:1969–1990Google Scholar
  14. Kusagawa M, Nakamura T, Asada Y (2001) Fundamental deformation and recovery behaviors of Ni–Ti–Nb shape memory alloy. JSME Int J Ser A Solid Mech Mater Eng 44:57–63Google Scholar
  15. Kwon OS, Nakata N, Elnashai AS, Spencer BF (2005) A framework for multi-site distributed simulation and application to complex structural systems. J Earthq Eng 9:741–753.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460509350564 Google Scholar
  16. Kwon OS, Nakata N, Park KS, Elnashai AS, Spencer BF (2007) User manual and examples for UI-SIMCOR v2.6. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, UrbanaGoogle Scholar
  17. Kwon OS, Elnashai AS, Spencer BF (2008) A framework for distributed analytical and hybrid simulations. Struct Eng Mech 30:331–350Google Scholar
  18. Mahin SA, Shing PB, Thewalt CR, Hanson RD (1989) Pseudodynamic test method—current status and future directions. J Struct Eng 115:2113–2128.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1989)115:8(2113) Google Scholar
  19. Mander JB, Priestley MJ, Park R (1988) Theoretical stress–strain model for confined concrete. J Struct Eng 114:1804–1826.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804) Google Scholar
  20. McKenna F, Fenves GL, Scott MH (2000) Open system for earthquake engineering simulation. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), RichmondGoogle Scholar
  21. Menegotto M, Pinto PE (1973) Method of analysis for cyclically loaded reinforced concrete plane frames including changes in geometry and inelastic behavior of elements under combined normal force and bending. In: IABSE symposium on resistance and ultimate deformability of structures acted on by well-defined repeated loads, Final report, LisbonGoogle Scholar
  22. Popovics S (1973) A numerical approach to the complete stress–strain curve of concrete. Cem Concr Res 3:583–599Google Scholar
  23. Scott BD, Park R, Priestley MJN (1982) Stress–strain behavior of concrete confined by overlapping hoops at low and high strain rates. ACI J 79:13–27Google Scholar
  24. Shin M, Andrawes B (2010) Experimental investigation of actively confined concrete using shape memory alloys. Eng Struct 32:656–664.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.11.012 Google Scholar
  25. Shin M, Andrawes B (2011) Lateral cyclic behavior of reinforced concrete columns retrofitted with shape memory spirals and FRP wraps. J Struct Eng 137:1282–1290.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000364 Google Scholar
  26. Shin M, Andrawes B (2012) Modeling and validation of RC columns seismically retrofitted using shape memory spiral. In: Proceedings of structures congress, Chicago.  https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784412367.051
  27. Shing PB, Nakashima M, Bursi OS (1996) Application of pseudodynamic test method to structural research. Earthq Spectra 12:29–56.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585867 Google Scholar
  28. Spacone E, Ciampi V, Filippou FC (1996a) Mixed formulation of nonlinear beam finite element. Comput Struct 58:71–83.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(95)00103-N Google Scholar
  29. Spacone E, Filippou FC, Taucer FF (1996b) Fibre beam-column model for non-linear analysis of R/C frames: Part I. Formulation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 25:711–726.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199607)25:7%3c727:AID-EQE577%3e3.0.CO;2-O Google Scholar
  30. Spencer BF, Elnashai A, Kuchma D, Kim S, Holub C, Nakata N (2006) Multi-site soil–structure–foundation interaction test (MISST). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, UrbanaGoogle Scholar
  31. Takahashi Y, Iemura H, Mahin S, Fenves GL (2008) International distributed hybrid simulation of 2-span continuous bridge. In: Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  32. Takanashi K, Nakashima M (1987) Japanese activities on on-line testing. J Eng Mech 113:1014–1032.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1987)113:7(1014) Google Scholar
  33. Takanashi K, Udagawa K, Seki M, Okada T, Tanaka H (1975) Nonlinear earthquake response analysis of structures by a computer-actuator on-line system. Bull Earthq Resist Struct Res Cent 8:1–17Google Scholar
  34. Terzic V, Stojadinovic B (2013) Hybrid simulation of bridge response to three-dimensional earthquake excitation followed by truck load. J Struct Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000913 Google Scholar
  35. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31:491–514.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141 Google Scholar
  36. Ying C, Hai-Chang J, Li-Jian R, Li X, Xin-Qing Z (2011) Mechanical behavior in NiTiNb shape memory alloys with low Nb content. Intermetallics 19:217–220.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intermet.2010.08.011 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations