***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
This manual extends the Instructions reported on page 4 of the form, with the aim of providing a tool for a correct training of the surveyors and for a full awareness of the principles of the form, as well as for the necessary homogeneity of judgment.
In Chapter 2, some information and guidelines on issues concerning the organisation of the damage and usability survey and the procedures for preparing and carrying out the building survey are given.
Chapter 3 provides a detailed description of each structural component, correlating it to the building component behaviour (thrusting or non thrusting roofs, masonry of good or bad quality, rigid or flexible floors, etc.). The layout of the data collection (i.e. of the form) relay on the personal opinion of the surveyor about the quality of the constructive components in the specific case under study. It is in fact possible that the manual does not consider a particular typology or that a given typology in a given area or in a specific building exhibits a seismic behaviour different from what can normally be expected, being it due to the maintenance state, or to the particular characteristics of a material used in that single case. For the general considerations expressed in the previous sections, the guidelines of section 4, concerning the damage survey of the main structural components (Chapter 4), are very wide and exhaustive.
Chapters 3 and 4 have many pictures and figures attached, respectively in the abacus of the construction typologies and in the examples of seismic damage. They offer an important reference inventory for the surveyor, that can help him in understanding the relationships between the observed reality and the descriptive synthesis operated when compiling the form. It is evident that a correct use of the form requires a complete understanding of the expected seismic behaviour of different structural components. This way, he can develop an independent ability in associating the typology to the behaviour, ability that he should use any time the encountered typology is not described in detail in the manual. An unquestionable advantage of this approach lies also in its didactic potentiality towards the inspectors. The need of giving in any case an opinion about each constructive component induces a global opinion about the building vulnerability which, associated to the damage assessment, produces a mature usability assessment (Chapter 5).
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Forensic Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering, 2nd Edition
Author: Robert W. Day | Size: 33.1 MB | Format:PDF | Publisher: McGraw-Hill Professional | Year: 2011 | pages: 528 | ISBN: 0071761330
Product Description
A complete, up-to-date guide for forensic engineers
Fully revised and packed with current case studies, Forensic Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering, Second Edition provides a step-by-step approach to conducting a professional forensic geotechnical and foundation investigation. This authoritative resource explains how to:
Investigate damage, deterioration, and collapse in a structure
Determine what caused the damage
Develop repair recommendations
Diagnose cracks
Prepare files and reports
Avoid civil liability
Helpful charts and photographs aid in your understanding of the material covered. With expert advice on all aspects of the process--from accepting the assignment to delivering compelling testimony--this is a practical, all-in-one guide to geotechnical and foundation investigations in forensic engineering.
Explains how to investigate damage due to:
Settlement of structures * Expansive soil * Lateral Movement * Earthquakes * Erosion * Deterioration * Bearing Capacity Failures * Shrinkage Cracking of Concrete Foundations * Timber Decay * Soluble Soil * Groundwater and Moisture Problems * And Other Causes
From the Back Cover
Why did the building collapse? What caused cracking in the bridge supports? Who's responsible for the sideways settling of the shopping mall? These are the types of questions forensics engineers answer, often as expert witnesses in legal procedures. Clearly written and easy to use, this authoritative book shows you how to conduct a professional forensic geotechnical and foundation investigation. Written by a leading forensic engineer and packed with interesting case studies, it shows you step-by-step how to: INVESTIGATE damage, deterioration, or collapse in a structure. EVALUATE problems caused by settlement, expansive soil, slope movement, moisture intrusion, and more. INVESTIGATE damage from earthquakes and other natural causes. DETERMINE what caused the damage. DEVELOP repair recommendations. PREPARE files and reports. AVOID civil liability. Sulfate attack, dam failure, tree roots, decomposition of organic matter, or any other factor--no matter what caused the structural damage, this book will help you pinpoint it and, if necessary, suggest a remedy. With advice on all aspects of the process, from accepting the assignment to testifying compellingly, this book is your all-in-one guide to geotechnical and foundation investigations in forensic engineering. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Serves as a supplemental text for an undergraduate and a primary textbook for a graduate course, and as a reference for practicing engineers and researchers in computational mechanics. Dow (structural mechanics, U. of Colorado-Boulder) provides background material about finite element results and techniques that can improve their accuracy. From a common theoretical foundation, he develops three error analysis techniques: modeling errors in individual elements, discretization errors in the overall model, and point-wise errors in the final stress or strain results.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
EFFECT OF COLUMN CAPACITY DESIGN ON EARTHQUAKE RESPONSE OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS
Author: T. B. PANAGIOTAKOS and M. N. FARDIS | Size: 7.59 MB | Format:PDF | Publisher: Journal of Earthquake Engineering | Year: 1997 | pages: 33
Journal of Earthquake Engineering Vol. 2, No. 1 (1998) 113-145
@ Imperial College Press
EFFECT OF COLUMN CAPACITY DESIGN ON EARTHQUAKE F&ESPONSE OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS
T. B. PANAGIOTAKOS and M. N. FARDIS
University of Patms, Department of Civil Engineering,
P. 0. Box 1424, 26500 P a t w , Greece
Received 20 February 1997
Revised 18 April 1997
Accepted 28 April 1997
Abstract:
In earthquake resistant design of RC frame buildings, capacity design of columns in flexure
is appIied to eliminate the possibiIity of storey sway mechanisms and to spread the
inelastic deformation demands and energy dissipation throughout the structure. The
paper considers two alternative column capacity designs: the conventional, full capacity
design of columns relative to the beams, and the relaxed one allowed by Eurocode 8 depending
on how much the seismic action controIs the flexural capacity of beams. Twelve
RC frame buildings, designed in detail according to the two capacity design alternatives,
are nonlinearly analysed under spectrum-compatible motions applied separately in the
two horizontal directions and scaled to intensity from once to twice the design ground
motion. In both design versions the slab participation to the beam tension flange is
considered either as in the design calculations - including those of capacity design -
i.e. very little, or as expected in reality, i.e. very significant. In most cases the dynamic
response to the design-level motion is found to be nearly elastic, due to the overstrength
of materials and members and to the "understress" of the structure due to crackinginduced
softening. At higher motion intensities the effect of column capacity design and
of the slab participation to the beam flexural capacity is not dramatic: column inelasticity
and some light damage cannot be prevented by relaxed or full capacity design, while
the large participation of the slab to the beam negative moment capacity does not overly
distort the strength balance between beams and columns or the seismic response of the
structure. Under any circumstances, column plastic hinging does not lead to a storey
sway mechanism.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Earthquake disasters affect many structures and infrastructure simultaneously
and collectively, and cause tremendous tangible and intangible loss. In particular, catastrophic
earthquakes impose tremendous financial stress on insurers who underwrite earthquake insurance
policies in a seismic region, resulting in possible insolvency. This study develops a
stochastic net worth model of an insurer undertaking both ordinary risk and catastrophic
earthquake risk, and evaluates its solvency and operability under catastrophic seismic risk.
The ordinary risk is represented by a geometric Brownian motion process, whereas the
catastrophic earthquake risk is characterized by an earthquake-engineering-based seismic
loss model. The developed model is applied to hypothetical 4000 wood-frame houses in
south-western British Columbia, Canada, to investigate the impact of key insurance portfolio
parameters to insurer’s ruin probability and business operability. The analysis results
indicate: (i) the physical effects of spatially correlated ground motions and local soil conditions
at insured properties are significant; (ii) the insurer’s earthquake risk exposure depends
greatly on insurance arrangement (e.g. deductible and cap); and (iii) themaintenance of sufficient
initial surplus is critical in keeping insurer’s insolvency potential reasonably low, while
volatility of non-catastrophic risk is the key for insurer’s business stability. The results highlight
the importance of adequate balance between business stability under normal conditions
and solvency under extreme conditions for efficient earthquake risk management. Flexibility
for determining an insurance arrangement would be beneficial for insurers to enhance their
portfolio performance and to offer more affordable coverage to their clients.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
This paper addresses the time history finite element analysis of rock-structure interaction. Modeled is not only the lateral energy dissipation, but also the interaction between the far field and the numerical model itself. This is accomplished by a preliminary analysis of the far field as a shear beam (for lateral excitation), and then velocities and displacements are transferred to the model as nodal forces through damping and stiffness matrices respectively. Details of the finite element implementation are given, along with an extensive series of simulations comparing this method, with the one of Lysmer for both 2D and 3D models. The model is derived from the principle of virtual work, and its implementation does not require any modification of existing finite element codes, only clever pre and postprocessing of results are needed.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
A performance-based adaptive methodology for the seismic assessment of highway bridges is proposed. The proposed methodology is based on an Inverse (I), Adaptive (A) application of the Capacity Spectrum Method (CSM), with the capacity curve of the bridge derived through a Displacement-based Adaptive Pushover (DAP) analysis. For this reason, the acronym IACSM is used to identify the proposed methodology. A number of Performance Levels (PLs), for which the seismic vulnerability and seismic risk of the bridge shall be evaluated, are identified. Each PL is associated to a number of Damage States (DSs) of the critical members of the bridge (piers, abutments, joints and bearing devices). The IACSM provides the earthquake intensity level (PGA) corresponding to the attainment of the selected DSs, using over-damped elastic response spectra as demand curves. The seismic vulnerability of the bridge is described by means of fragility curves, derived based on the PGA values associated to each DS. The seismic risk of the bridge is evaluated as convolution integral of the product between the fragility curves and the seismic hazard curve of the bridge site. In this paper, the key aspects and basic assumptions of the proposed methodology are presented first. The IACSM is then applied to nine existing simply supported deck bridges, characterized by different types of piers and bearing devices. Finally, the IACSM predictions are compared with the results of nonlinear response time-history analysis, carried out using a set of seven ground motions scaled to the expected PGA values.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Please help me these papers:
[1] Whitman R.V., and Richart F.E., Jr., "Design Procedures for Dynamically
Loaded Foundations," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Division, ASCE Vol. 93, No. SM 6, November 1967
[2] Richart F.E., Jr., and Whitman R.V., "Comparison of Footing Vibration
Tests with Theory," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division,
ASCE Vol. 93, No. SM 6, November 1967
Dear Admins, Am I blocked from seeing any threads? I cannot view any threads. It shows that either I am blocked, banned or not registered which as far as I know I am not. I dont have post but I like to read post of others to enlighten me. I did not receive any warnings or messages from any moderators or admins. Can you check my account? It will be gladly appreciated. Thank you.
![[Image: 76280711688560432578.jpg]](http://pic.civilea.com/images/76280711688560432578.jpg)
![[Image: Download.png]](https://forum.civilea.com/postgen/icon/Download.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: 46313506957672779391.jpg]](http://pic.civilea.com/images/46313506957672779391.jpg)
![[Image: info.png]](https://forum.civilea.com/postgen/icon/info.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: 23205166604203427769.jpg]](http://pic.civilea.com/images/23205166604203427769.jpg)
![[Image: password.png]](https://forum.civilea.com/postgen/icon/password.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: 23776413812031847086.jpeg]](http://pic.civilea.com/images/23776413812031847086.jpeg)
![[Image: 13267429542901298991.jpg]](http://pic.civilea.com/images/13267429542901298991.jpg)
![[Image: 66872612964536017123.jpg]](http://pic.civilea.com/images/66872612964536017123.jpg)
![[Image: 85759340700022040474.jpg]](http://pic.civilea.com/images/85759340700022040474.jpg)
![[Image: 51298769152547907993.jpg]](http://pic.civilea.com/images/51298769152547907993.jpg)
