340 likes | 536 Views
Fire Testing of an Earthquake Damaged R.C. Frame Presented by: U.K. Sharma/Pradeep Bhargava Under UKIERI Project being Jointly Investigated by: Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee University of Edinburgh, U.K. Indian Institute of Science Bangalore. INTRODUCTION
E N D
Fire Testing of an Earthquake Damaged R.C. Frame Presented by: U.K. Sharma/Pradeep Bhargava Under UKIERI Project being Jointly Investigated by: Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee University of Edinburgh, U.K. Indian Institute of Science Bangalore
INTRODUCTION • Major earthquakes have been followed by multiple ignitions • San Francisco, 1906 • Tokyo, 1923 • San Fernando, 1971 • Northridge, 1994 • Hanshin (Kobe), 1995 • Izmit (crude and naptha tanks), 1999
Due to rapid urbanisation, there is an increasing risk of Fire Following Earthquake (F.F.E.) events. • FFE events have added a new dimension to disaster management and call for substantial research effort to address the relevant challenges . • The collaborative research project between the University of Edinburgh, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee and the Indian Institute of Science Bangalore proposes to conduct large-scale tests to investigate the behaviour of (earthquake-induced) pre-damaged R.C. frames in fire.
Summary of the proposed frame tests *for as long as considered safe (maximum 1 hr) †applied incrementally and cyclically
Plan and elevation of the frame sub-assemblage proposed to be tested
Detailing of the frame sub-assemblage Detailing of a typical beam
F Brick masonry infill 115 thick Fire compartment 4300 both ways 3000 c/c both ways All Columns- 300x300 mm All Beams-230x230 Column Beam 120 thick slab Framing plan of the frame sub-assemblage
Test set-up configuration Brick masonry infill wall in perimeter
Nominal location of thermo-couples and strain gauges INSTRUMENTATION
Nominal location of thermocouples and strain gauges in the slab
Analytical modeling of the frame sub-assemblage • The sub-assemblage was designed as part of a 4-storey moment resistant R.C frame located in seismic zone IV of IS 1893 (Part 1):2002. Ductile detailing was carried out as per IS 13920. (a) (b) Detailing of a typical beam, (a), and a column, (b). • When calibrated against the Eurocode 8, the design was found to be sufficiently ductile. However, a plastic analysis of the sub-assemblage indicated that the first hinge formed in a column instead of a beam
Beam bars=2-12ø+3-16ø at top and bottom Col. bars=8-12ø Finite element model of the frame sub-assemblage showing hinging in columns
Plastification at joint Beam bars=3-16ø at top and bottom Col. bars=8-20ø Beam hinging The modification of detailing in the beams and columns resulted in a more Desirable pattern of hinging
Analytical load-displacement relationships (a) SAP frame model (b) ABAQUS finite element model Comparison of the predicted load-displacement relationships for the frame sub-assemblage from SAP and ABAQUS
Mock Fire Tests Thermocouple tree Fuel tray Front elevation of the fire compartment for the mock tests
Time-temperature relationships for the fire compartment near the centre of the back wall and opposite to the opening
Strong floor – reaction wall system Detailing of rebars in the strong floor, dowels for the footing can also be seen
Freshly cast concrete in the strong floor, dowels for the orthogonal reaction walls can be seen in the background
Erection of the reinforcement cage for the reaction wall. Pipe sleeves for anchoring the loading jacks can also be seen
The quasi-static loads shall be applied with a pair of these 500 kN capacity double acting hydraulic jacks
Target displacement Earthquake loading simulation Time Displacement Proposed (quasi-static) loading history for the frame sub-assemblage
Another Aim of the Project: Stress-Strain Models for Pre-Damaged Materials Present Models • Stressed Tests • Unstressed Tests • Residual Tests Stress – strain relationships for concrete at elevated temperature
Structural Modelling Round-robinExercise • The challenge: • To model blind the behaviour of a concrete structure during fire following earthquake • Aiming to • Identify strengths and weaknesses of modelling capabilities • If interested contact Martin Gillie: • m.gillie@ed.ac.uk • www.see.ed.ac.uk/~s0458490/UKIERI/
Predictions • Horizontal and vertical deflections during the earthquake loading • Temperature of the rebar during heating and cooling • Horizontal and vertical deflections during heating and cooling
Dates • Competition announced June 2010 • Structural data on website Summer 2010 • Date of test Late Summer 2010 • Confirmation of required predictions Day after test • Submission of predictions 1 March 2011 • Results conference Spring 2011