CIVL505 Literature Review 3
-
Upload
jatkinson2 -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of CIVL505 Literature Review 3
-
8/12/2019 CIVL505 Literature Review 3
1/2
Citation: Moehle, J .P. and Mahin, S.A., (1991). Observations of the behaviour
of reinforced concrete buildings during earthquakes , Earthquake-Resistant
Concrete Structures Inelastic Response and Design, American Concrete
Institute, SP-127.
Keywords: Seismic response, reinforced concrete, earthquake reconnaissance, building design
SUMMARY
Provide brief summary of the paper including research question being addressed,
methodology, results and main conclusions (maximum 100 words)
This literature presents general observations on the performance of reinforced concrete buildings
in past earthquakes. Although subjective and sometimes ambiguous, performance observations are
useful for structural engineers to appreciate the potential factors influencing structural behaviour,
even if they can only be discerned at a conceptual level. Based on the observations in this paper, it
can be seen that buildings with simple geometry and well defined load paths generally performedwell while buildings with irregularities or complex geometries tended to have issues. It is
concluded that despite the many advancements in the field, advanced computer models are no
substitute for simple, continuous, and redundant structural systems.
METHODOLOGY
Give a brief summary of how the author(s) conducted the research on the topic including
research framework (analytical/ survey/experimental etc.), how the problem was
formulated, method and accuracy of the data, reproducibility of the results
(maximum 150 words)
The paper surveys a collection of past earthquake reconnaissance reports ranging from the 1957
Mexico City earthquake to the 1989 Armenia earthquake. Based on the reconnaissance
observations, common trends of poorly-performing and well-performing concrete structures are
detected from these previous studies. The observations are categorized into topics relating to the
structural concept (observations about continuity, regularity, stiffness, proximity to adjacent
buildings, mass, redundancy, and previous shaking exposure) and proportioning and detailing
(locations of inelastic deformation, determination of member actions, transverse reinforcement,
anchorage and connections, and construction). The observations are general and high-level,
because the exact behaviour or failure mechanism of such structures cannot always be discerned as
most observations tend to occur post-event or post-collapse.
-
8/12/2019 CIVL505 Literature Review 3
2/2
2
RESULTS & DISCUSSION
Provide a critical analysis of the results and discussion components of the paper including
the primary outcomes, assessment of the data analysis (interpretation) and relevance to the
research question ( maximum 200 words)
The primary motivation behind this paper is to improve upon the seismic design of buildings, by
considering the performance of past building designs in earthquakes. An issue that arises from such
observations is that the differences between building codes, typical practice, standards, and
construction quality are not easily accounted for. Additionally, statements like Generous supply
and appropriate placement of transverse reinforcement in concrete beams, columns, and walls have
proven to be desirable, are a useful observation to direct further detailed study, but are not so
useful to the designer who is left wondering if supplying the minimum code-mandated
reinforcement is adequate. Conversely, the observations relating to the structural concept are
generally linked to conceptually well-understood phenomenon, where such detail is not necessary.
CONTRIBUTION AND FUTURE RESEARCH
How does this paper contribute to knowledge development in earthquake engineering or to
engineering practice? What are the limitations of the study? What future research directions
are identified? Is this paper helpful for your own graduate studies/research? If so, how?
(Maximum 150 words)
Observations on the performance of different structural concepts are highly relevant to the
profession. As demonstrated in previous earthquakes, buildings may satisfy all code requirements
yet still have undesirable behaviour or performance. Compiling these observations serves as auseful conceptual check. As more earthquakes occur, an effort should be made to reconcile the
observations in this paper with observations on the performance of newer buildings, which would
presumably have better detailing and stricter requirements for irregularities. Perhaps with newer
construction, the observed issues related to structural detailing would become less apparent. The
authors do make a very relevant point, however, that the special detailing for inelastic action is of
little use if the global inelastic behaviour is not well understood or considered. The paper is a useful
reference to keep in mind when assessing or designing a structure, especially when design
constraints necessitate irregularities, or when analysis assumptions need to be made.