We are so sorry due to last problem in loading Civilea.com website.
Recently we have high load on old server, we decided to upgrade our main server, we migrated to a good and also expensive server at same datacenter, CivilEA is located on this datacenter in last 4 year and we really agree with it, they are expert, famous, friendly company.
Thus we start migrating to next level server, some problem are usual after migration, for example DNS problem. anyway after about 72 hours CivilEA was accessible in all around world. Unfortunately last night our new server crashed and we did not access to server from our location. We shall wait, only staff of datacenter can help us, they start to recover server, this is their last comment:" You were one of the very few clients that suffered a Raid 5 Disk Array failure. " Yes, unfortunately HDD of server crashed, and unfortunately due to latest migration we do not have online back up of forum, this mean we missed some data, unfortunately we backed to data of 5 days ago,We are so sorry for this issue, we worked hard to recover data, we are working non-stop on server during last week.
Our datacenter will report us about last issue in next week,
Be note that we missed data during last 5 days.I am so tired and sad, very bad chance....
some users that registered during last 5 days and also bought subscription plan, need to registered again, then send us their username and also previous payment detail here:
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:
Article/eBook Full Name: soil mechanic and foundation
Author(s): Dr. B.C. Punmia, Ashok Kumar Jain, Arun Kr. Jain
Publish Date: 2005
ISBN: 978-8170087915
Published By: Laxmi Publications (December 15, 2005)
Related Links:
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:
I am searching for this paper since it is used as a reference for the SRD curves, used as input for drivability analysis for piles. Does anyone has it?
Article/eBook Full Name: Evaluating Drivability for Hard Clay, Very Dense Sand, and Rock
Author(s): Stevens, R.S., Wiltsie, E.A., Turton, H.
Publish Date: 1982
ISBN: 978-1-61399-072-8
Published By: Offshore Technology Conference (OTC)
Related Links:
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:
Article Full Name: Centrifuge modelling of piled raft foundations on clay
Author(s): K. Horikoshi ; M. F. Randolph
Publish Date: 1996
Related Links:
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:
VULNERABILITY OF HISTORICAL MASONRY BUILDINGS UNDER EXCEPTIONAL ACTIONS
Author: Gilda Florio | Size: 23.1 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II Facoltà di Ingegneria | Year: 2010 | pages: 292
This work focuses on the vulnerability of historical masonry buildings under
exceptional actions. So, the three key-concepts of this thesis are:
1. Vulnerability
2. Historical masonry construction
3. Exceptional action
The vulnerability of a constructions represents its propensity to suffer a certain damage level under a catastrophic event, seismic or not. It is commonly expressed by functions or matrices which may be obtained either by statistical studies of damaged buildings in earthquake-struck areas or by simulations using numerical models of the structure. Seismic vulnerability topic is included in the field of seismic risk, which also involves hazard and exposure. The importance of seismic risk is related to the public safety that requires suitable management measures in order to protect people, properties, infrastructures and the built up cultural heritage. Therefore, a seismic risk analysis is aimed at the assessment and the hypothetical, quantitative description of the consequences of earthquakes upon a geographical area in a certain period of time. The most vulnerable construction, but also the most valuable ones, are the historical ones, mostly made of oldest building material, that is masonry. In fact, on one hand ancient masonry structures are particularly vulnerable to dynamic actions, especially seismic actions, since they were designed to resist ordinary vertical loads only, in compliance with the technical rules of their time of construction, so that they present an insufficient safety level against the exceptional actions. On the other hand, old constructions constitute the cultural heritage of a nation, because they are imbued with historicity. This historicity
does not only coincides with the concept of monuments or with the formal architectural language, but also to the specific structural features, applied materials and building techniques and, due to their age, to the fact that they are a part of human life. Thus, the historical heritage include monumental buildings, which may have great artistic values and are characterized by their own unique history, and historical centres, which represent the sign of the human past. The issue of the protection of historic building is very important in Italy. In fact, this Nation is characterized by a large number of ancient monuments and dwellings, apart from innumerable minor centres. This need of preservation of the built up heritage is strongly related to the past lessons. Italy, indeed, has experienced destructive earthquakes throughout its history, which have provoked considerable social and economic losses. For this reasons, the public awareness is very sensitized of this issue and the conservation of the historic heritage becomes a pressing need.
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:
Seismic Performance of Brick Infilled RC Frame Structures in Low and Medium rise Buildings in Bhutan
Author: Jigme Dorji | Size: 4.8 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: Centre for Built Environment and Engineering Research Queensland University of echnology | Year: June 2009 | pages: 158
The construction of reinforced concrete buildings w
ith unreinforced infill is common practice even in seismically active country such as Bhutan, which is located in high seismic region of Eastern Himalaya. All buildings c onstructed prior 1998 were constructed without seismic provisions while those constructed after this period adopted seismic codes of neighbouring country, India. However, the codes have limited information on the design of infilled struc tures besides having differences in architectural requirements which may compound the structural problems. Although the influence of infill on the reinforced concrete framed structures is known, thepresent seismic codes do not consider it due to the lack of sufficient information.Time history analyses were performed to study the influence of infill on the performance of concrete framed structures. Important parameters were considered and
the results presented in a manner that can be used
by practitioners. The results show that the influence of infill on the structural performance is significant. The structural responses such as funda mental period, roof displacement,
inter-storey drift ratio, stresses in infill wall a
nd structural member forces of beams
and column generally reduce, with incorporation of
infill wall. The structures designed and constructed with or without seismic provision perform in a similar manner if the infills of high strength are used.
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:
PERFORMANCE-BASED SEISMIC VULNERABILITY EVALUATION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS IN OLD SECTORS OF QUEBEC
Author: Amin KARBASSI | Size: 4 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: McGill University – Department of Civil Engineering and Applied Mechanics THIS THESIS WAS PRESENTED AND DEFENDED BEFORE A BOARD OF EXAMINERS AND PUBLIC June 15, 2010 AT ÉCOLE DE TECHNOLOGIE SUPÉRIEURE | Year: JULY 20, 2010
To perform a seismic vulnerability evaluation for the existing buildings in old sectors of
Quebec, two major tools at two different levels are missing: first, in the context of the
seismic vulnerability assessment of a group of buildings, an updated rapid visual screening
method which complies with the Uniform Hazard Spectra presented in the 2005 version of the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC) does not exist; and second, in the context of loss estimation studies, capacity and fragility curves which are developed based on the specific building typologies present in those sectors are required. In this research work, in the first place, a building classification for the existing buildings in old sectors of Quebec considering the masonry as the main construction material is proposed. Later, an updated rapid visual screening method—in the form of vulnerability indices for different typologies and cities in Quebec—which is adapted to the Uniform Hazard Spectra in NBCC 2005 is proposed. The structural vulnerability indices (SVI) are calculated through the application of the improved nonlinear static analysis procedure in FEMA 440 Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures for three levels of seismic hazard. A set of index modifiers are also presented for the building height, irregularities, and the design and construction year. To deal with the second problem, on the other hand, a performance-based seismic vulnerability evaluation method is applied to examine the structural performance of two buildings—a 6-storey industrial masonry building and a 5-storey concrete frame with masonry infill walls, as two of the building classes constructed vastly in old sectors in Quebec—at multiple seismic demand levels. The results of such an assessment are used to develop dynamic capacity and fragility curves for the target buildings. The Applied Element Method is used here as an alternative to FE-based methods to conduct a thorough 4-step performance-based seismic vulnerability evaluation. To this end, the Incremental DynamicAnalyses (IDA) for the buildings are carried out using various sets of synthetic and real ground motions representing three M and R categories. Consequently, the fragility curves are developed for the three structural performance levels—Immediate Occupancy, Life Safety, and Collapse Prevention. Finally, the mean annual frequencies of exceeding those performance levels are calculated by combining the data from the calculated fragility curves and those from the region’s hazard curves. The proposed method is shown to be useful to conduct seismic vulnerability evaluations in regions for which little observed damage data exists.
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:
In order to learn how to analyze typical reinforced concrete buildings, understand their seismic
behavior and to learn how guidelines such as ASCE 41, ATC-40 and FEMA could apply to buildings in
Pakistan, the project team idealized a typical Karachi residential-commercial mixed use building as
the pilot case study building. For simplicity, the team investigated the behavior of two-dimensional
frame models with and without infill walls, and simplified certain structural details. A separate
report describes a study of the three dimensional model of the building.
The building upon which the idealized case study structure is based is located in Gulistan-e-Johar, a
densely populated area in Karachi. This building consists of reinforced concrete framed building with
five storeys including the ground floor. The building has shops located at the ground floor, while the
above floors have residential apartments. The building was constructed before the 2005 Kashmir
Earthquake. Project participants selected this building as the pilot case study because it has several
seismic vulnerabilities common to mixed-use residential buildings in Karachi: a weak story created by
open shop fronts at the ground floor, an eccentrically located reinforced concrete core, and heavy,
stiff unreinforced masonry infill walls that were not considered during the structural design of the
building.
The case study team assessed the building’s potential seismic vulnerabilities using the US Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Prestandard 310 Tier 1 Checklist modified for Pakistan
conditions, as well as the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Standard 31 Tier 2 and 3
analyses and acceptance and modeling criteria from ASCE 41. The building was found to be
inadequate for seismic zone 4 and requires retrofitting to rectify the soft storey at the base and
provide lateral stability to the building.
The team examined a number of potential retrofit solutions for both seismic performance and
economic considerations. In order to provide a cost-effective and minimally intrusive retrofit, the
team selected a rocking spine retrofit solution. A spine of existing infill panels reinforced with
shotcrete above a reinforced concrete wall at the open ground storey prevents the building from
collapsing. The spine provides stability and strength without extensive foundation work. This retrofit
solution promises to be an innovative and cost-effective alternative for buildings in Pakistan.
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:
SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS IN THE 22 FEBRUARY CHRISTCHURCH (LYTTELTON) EARTHQUAKE
Author: Weng Y. Kam , Stefano Pampanin , Ken Elwood3 | Size: 5.9 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | pages: 40
Six months after the 4 September 2010 Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake, a Mw 6.2 Christchurch
(Lyttelton) aftershock struck Christchurch on the 22 February 2011. This earthquake was centred approximately 10km south-east of the Christchurch CBD at a shallow depth of 5km, resulting in intense seismic shaking within the Christchurch central business district (CBD). Unlike the 4 Sept earthquake
when limited-to-moderate damage was observed in engineered reinforced concrete (RC) buildings [35], in the 22 February event a high number of RC Buildings in the Christchurch CBD (16.2 % out of 833) were severely damaged. There were 182 fatalities, 135 of which were the unfortunate consequences of
the complete collapse of two mid-rise RC buildings.
This paper describes immediate observations of damage to RC buildings in the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Some preliminary lessons are highlighted and discussed in light of the observed performance of the RC building stock. Damage statistics and typical damage patterns are
presented for various configurations and lateral resisting systems. Data was collated predominantly from
first-hand post-earthquake reconnaissance observations by the authors, complemented with detailed assessment of the structural drawings of critical buildings and the observed behaviour. Overall, the 22 February 2011 Mw 6.2 Christchurch earthquake was a particularly severe test for both
modern seismically-designed and existing non-ductile RC buildings. The sequence of earthquakes since
the 4 Sept 2010, particularly the 22 Feb event has confirmed old lessons and brought to life new critical
ones, highlighting some urgent action required to remedy structural deficiencies in both existing and
“modern” buildings. Given the major social and economic impact of the earthquakes to a country with
strong seismic engineering tradition, no doubt some aspects of the seismic design will be improved based
on the lessons from Christchurch. The bar needs to and can be raised, starting with a strong endorsement
of new damage-resisting, whilst cost-efficient, technologies as well as the strict enforcement, including
financial incentives, of active policies for the seismic retrofit of existing buildings at a national scale.
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:
COMPONENT BASED SEISMIC VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE FOR RC BUILDINGS
Author: EMRAH ERDURAN | Size: 1.8 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: Ph.D., Department of Civil Engineering Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Yakut | Year: JULY 2005
In the last fifteen years, Turkey has lost tens of thousands of its citizens and huge amounts of economic properties in moderate and severe earthquakes. Moreover, most of the population and industry of Turkey is under the threat of a possible major earthquake since they are located in earthquake prone regions. The current seismic code of Turkey [1] was rewritten in 1998 to enable the satisfactory performance of the structures and thus to reduce loss after a major earthquake. However, a vast majority of the structures in Turkey had been constructed before the adaptation of the 1998 Turkish Earthquake Code [1]. Moreover, newstructures are not generally designed and/or constructed according to the provisions of this code resulting in a huge number of deficient structures. As a result the engineers in Turkey, like most of their colleagues in the world, are faced with a critical question which must be answered immediately: Which buildings are safe and which must be strengthened or even demolished? For decades researchers have been studying on developing seismic vulnerability assessment procedures to overcome this problem. These vulnerability assessment procedures can be categorized in three according to the level of complexity they contain. The first level of seismic assessment procedures is known as the walk-down survey or street survey and is the quickest and simplest way of ranking the buildings in a building stock relative to each other based on their certain attributes. The typical parameters used in this type of assessment procedures are the number of stories, the age of the building, vertical
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:
![[Image: 91021385905362827029.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/91021385905362827029.png)
![[Image: info.png]](http://postgen.civilea.com/icon/info.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: mirror.png]](http://postgen.civilea.com/icon/mirror.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: 21549004653221108212.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/21549004653221108212.png)
![[Image: 82975785326850478817.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/82975785326850478817.png)
![[Image: 65681271644557125129.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/65681271644557125129.png)
![[Image: 28130631876660543201.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/28130631876660543201.png)
![[Image: 90741954365901743139.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/90741954365901743139.png)