Affiliation:
1. Viện Khoa học công nghệ xây dựng
2. Nanyang Technological University
Abstract
In the design and assessment of reinforced concrete (RC) structure against progressive collapse via single column removal scenario, also known as “alternate load path method”, development of secondary mechanisms, i.e. compressive arch action (CAA) and catenary action (CA) in double-span beams has been investigated and identified in many previous researches. The majority of the experimental tests are conducted on symmetrical double-span beams (identical span length and reinforcement detailing at both beam span). However, variations in details of beams adjacent to one another are not uncommon in RC building designs and constructions. Hence, a research study (as presented in this paper) with total of 5 RC frame tests are conducted to investigate the development of secondary mechanisms (CAA and CA) in a double-span beam with unsymmetrical 1) span length and 2) beam detailing. For each unsymmetrical case (span length and beam detailing), there will be 1 unsymmetrical double-span beam, and 2 symmetrical double-span beams (each representing one side of the unsymmetrical double-span beam) to serve as reference for quantifying the development of secondary mechanism in unsymmetrical double-span beams. The behaviour and development of secondary mechanisms are thoroughly analysed based on test observation, measured forces and displacements, etc.
Publisher
Vietnam Institute for Building Science and Technology
Subject
Ocean Engineering,General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Engineering,General Environmental Science,General Medicine,Development,Geography, Planning and Development,General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science,Materials Chemistry
Reference13 articles.
1. [1] Department of Defense (DOD 2013), Design of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse. Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4-023-03, 1 July.
2. [2] EN 1991-2-7:2006, Eurocode 1: Action on Structures – Part 1-7: General actions – Accidental actions.
3. [3] EN 1992-1-1:2004, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures – Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings.
4. [4] Farhangvesali, N., Valipour, H.R., Samali, B. & Foster, S.J. (2013), Development of arching action in longitudinally-restrained reinforced concrete beams. Constr Build Material, 47, pp. 7–19.
5. [5] General Services Administration (GSA 2016), Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New Federal Office Buildings and Major Modernization Projects. GSA, Washington, DC.