臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

This study proposes innovative multi-spiral confinement for reinforced concrete columns. The proposed confinement schemes include of seven-spiral for oblong columns, six-spiral and eleven-spiral for rectangular columns. Three series of test were conducted to investigate the cyclic performance of columns with proposed innovative multi-spiral confinement. The shear and flexural behavior of the multi-spiral columns with 1/3 scale were examined in Phase I and Phase II, respectively. The seismic performance and construction cost of a large-scale rectangular column with six-spiral reinforcement was investigated in Phase III to compare with those of a corresponding rectangular column with conventional tied reinforcement. Test results showed that the columns with proposed innovative multi-spiral reinforcement exhibited better performance in both shear and flexure than the corresponding tied columns, even with less amount of transverse reinforcement. In addition, based on automation technology, multi-spiral columns have lower construction cost and construction time compared with tied columns. Multi-spiral confinement worked very effectively without any separation among the spirals. Multi-spiral columns with H-shaped as longitudinal reinforcement showed significantly higher ductility and energy dissipation, but lower overstrength than columns with deformed bars.
The discrete computation shear strength (DCSS) models were proposed to calculate shear strength provided by multi-spiral transverse reinforcement. Examination of the difference between the DCSS models and integral averaging method shows that the error of the later increases with increasing ratio of spacing to diameter of spirals. The limiting values of spacing to diameter ratios were proposed to control the error of integral averaging method to be equal or less than 10%. Plot of modification factors were proposed to be used with the simplification calculation when the spacing to diameter ratio is large.
Moreover, in term of shear failure point prediction, both Caltrans SDC and Sezen models are good to provide close estimates of experimental behavior. To predict the maximum probable moment strengths, only the Caltrans SDC method produced conservative result for all columns tested.

This study proposes innovative multi-spiral confinement for reinforced concrete columns. The proposed confinement schemes include of seven-spiral for oblong columns, six-spiral and eleven-spiral for rectangular columns. Three series of test were conducted to investigate the cyclic performance of columns with proposed innovative multi-spiral confinement. The shear and flexural behavior of the multi-spiral columns with 1/3 scale were examined in Phase I and Phase II, respectively. The seismic performance and construction cost of a large-scale rectangular column with six-spiral reinforcement was investigated in Phase III to compare with those of a corresponding rectangular column with conventional tied reinforcement. Test results showed that the columns with proposed innovative multi-spiral reinforcement exhibited better performance in both shear and flexure than the corresponding tied columns, even with less amount of transverse reinforcement. In addition, based on automation technology, multi-spiral columns have lower construction cost and construction time compared with tied columns. Multi-spiral confinement worked very effectively without any separation among the spirals. Multi-spiral columns with H-shaped as longitudinal reinforcement showed significantly higher ductility and energy dissipation, but lower overstrength than columns with deformed bars.
The discrete computation shear strength (DCSS) models were proposed to calculate shear strength provided by multi-spiral transverse reinforcement. Examination of the difference between the DCSS models and integral averaging method shows that the error of the later increases with increasing ratio of spacing to diameter of spirals. The limiting values of spacing to diameter ratios were proposed to control the error of integral averaging method to be equal or less than 10%. Plot of modification factors were proposed to be used with the simplification calculation when the spacing to diameter ratio is large.
Moreover, in term of shear failure point prediction, both Caltrans SDC and Sezen models are good to provide close estimates of experimental behavior. To predict the maximum probable moment strengths, only the Caltrans SDC method produced conservative result for all columns tested.

ABSTRACT i
Acknowledgment iii
Table of Contents v
List of Tables ix
List of figures xi
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1. Background 1
1.2. Objectives and scopes 4
1.3. Organization 4
Chapter 2 Literature review 6
2.1. Previous research about multi-spiral confinement 6
2.1.1. Oblong two-spiral columns 6
2.1.2. Square multi-spiral columns 8
2.2. Confinement 10
2.3. Shear 12
2.3.1. Nominal shear strength by ACI 318-11 12
2.3.2. Shear strength prediction models 14
2.4. Moment 18
2.4.1. Nominal moment strength 18
2.4.2. Maximum probable moment 18
2.5. Concrete models 20
2.6. Reinforcing steel bar models 20
2.6.1. Model for reinforcing steel bars under monotonic loading 20
2.6.2. Model for reinforcing steel bars including buckling 21
2.7. Idealized force-displacement procedure (FEMA 356) 24
Chapter 3 Proposed innovative multi-spiral confinement 25
Chapter 4 Specimen design and experimental program 29
4.1. Specimen design 30
4.1.1. Shear column 30
4.1.2. Flexural column 36
4.1.3. Large-scale column 42
4.2. Test set up and loading protocol 49
4.2.1. For 1/3 scale columns (Phase I and Phase II) 49
4.2.2. For large-scale columns (Phase III) 51
4.3. Instrumentation 52
Chapter 5 Shear behavior of oblong bridge columns with innovative multi-spiral transverse reinforcement 55
5.1. Test results and discussion 55
5.2. Curvature and shear strain distribution of shear columns 65
5.3. Comparison of shear strength predictions with test results 68
Chapter 6 Flexural behavior of oblong and rectangular columns with innovative multi-spiral transverse reinforcement 71
6.1. Test results and discussion 71
6.2. Curvature and shear strain distribution of flexural columns 82
6.3. Lateral confining pressure by multi-spiral reinforcement 87
6.4. Nominal moment strength and maximum probable moment strength for capacity design 90
Chapter 7 Cyclic behavior of large-scale column with innovative six-spiral reinforcement 94
7.1. Test result and discussion 94
7.2. Nominal moment strength and maximum probable moment strength for capacity design 100
7.3. Comparison of constructability and construction cost 101
Chapter 8 Discrete computational shear strength models for multi-circular-hoop and spiral reinforcement 103
8.1. Motivation 103
8.2. General DCSS model for single-circular-hoop reinforcement 106
8.3. General model for single-spiral reinforcement 108
8.4. DCSS models for two- and seven-circular-hoop and spiral reinforcement 111
8.5. Normalized shear strength factor 114
8.6. Critical shear crack 114
8.7. The factor for critical shear crack 123
8.8. Comparison with test results 126
8.9. Shear strength models for rectangular columns with multi-circular-hoop and spiral transverse reinforcement 130
8.9.1. Simplified shear strength calculation 130
8.9.2. DCSS models 131
8.9.3. Modification factor 138
Chapter 9 Design suggestions for confinement, shear and flexural strengths 144
9.1. Confinement by multi-spiral transverse reinforcement 144
9.2. Shear strength (Vs) provided by multi-spiral transverse reinforcement 145
9.3. Maximum probable moment strength 146
Chapter 10 Conclusion and Suggestion 147
10.1. Conclusion 147
10.2. Suggestion 149
References 150
APPENDIX A: Design Transverse reinforcement 155
APPENDIX B: Shear strength calculation example 159
APPENDIX C: Specimen design 170
APPENDIX D: Reading strain gauge 179

ACI Committee 318. (2011). “Building Code Requirement for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary,” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 503 pp.
ACI Committee 374. (2005). “Acceptance Criteria for Moment Frames Based on Structural Testing and Commentary,” American Concrete Institute, 9 pp.
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. (2011). “AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design,” 2th edition, Washington, DC, 296 pp.
Ang, B. G., Priestley, M. J. N., and Paulay, T. (1989). “Seismic Shear Strength of Circular Reinforced Concrete Columns”, ACI Structural Journal, V. 86, No. 1, pp. 45-59.
Benzoni, G.; Priestley, M. J. N.; and Seible, F. (2000). “Seismic Shear Strength of Columns with Interlocking Spiral Reinforcement,” 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, 8 pp.
Builes-Mejia, J. C., and Itani, A. (2010). “Stability of Bridge Column Rebar Cages During Construction,” Report No. CCEER-10-7, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada.
California Department of Transportation. (2003). “Bridge Design Specifications,” Engineering Service Center, Earthquake Engineering Branch, Calif., pp. 8-1 to 8-58.
California Department of Transportation. (2010). “Seismic Design Criteria Version 1.6,” Engineering Service Center, Earthquake Engineering Branch, Calif., 160 pp.
Correal, J. F., Saiidi, M. S., and Sanders, D. H. (2004). “Seismic Performance of RC Bridge Columns Reinforced with Two Interlocking Spirals,” Report No. CCEER-04-06, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, USA, 438 pp.
Correal, J. F., Saiidi, M. S., Sanders, D., and El-Azazy, S. (2007a). “Shake Table Studies of Bridge Columns with Double Interlocking Spirals,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 104, No. 4, pp. 393-401.
Correal, J. F., Saiidi, M. S., Sanders, D., and El-Azazy, S. (2007b). “Analytical Evaluation of Bridge Columns with Double Interlocking Spirals,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 104, No. 3, pp. 314-323.
Cusson, D., and Paultre, P. (1993). “Stress-Strain Model for Confined High-Strength Concrete.” Journal of structural Engineering, ASCE , 121(3) 468-477.
Dancygier, A. N. (2001). “Shear Carried by Transverse Reinforcement in Circular RC Elements,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 127, No. 1, pp. 81-83.
Dhakal, R. P., and Maekawa, K. (2002). “Modeling for postyield buckling of reinforcement.” Journal of structural Engineering, ASCE, 128(9) 1139-1147.
Dhakal, R. P., and Maekawa, K. (2002). “Path-dependent cyclic stress-Strain relationship of reinforcing bar including buckling.” Engineering Structure, 24, 1383-1396.
FEMA 356 (2000). Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.
Hoshikuma, J., Kawashima, K., Nagaya, K., and Taylor, A. W. (1997). ”Stress-Strain model for confined reinforced concrete in bridge piers.” Journal of structural Engineering, ASCE, 123(5), 624–633.
Igase, Y., Nomura, K., Kuroiwa, T., and Miyagi, T. (2002). “Seismic Performance and Construction Method of Bridge Columns with Interlocking Spiral/Hoop Reinforcement,” Concrete Journal, V. 40, No. 2, pp. 37-46 (in Japanese).
Jaafar, K. (2009). “Discrete Versus Average Integration in Shear Assessment of Spiral Links,” Canada Journal of Civil Engineering, V. 36, pp. 171-179.
Kim, J. H., and Mander, J. B. (2005). “Theoretical Shear Strength of Concrete Columns Due to Transverse Steel,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 131, No. 1, pp. 197-199.
Mander, J. B. (1983). “Seismic design of bridge Piers.” PhD thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Mander, J. B., Panthaki, F. D., and Kasalanati, A. (1994). “Low-cycle fatigue behavior of reinforcing steel.” Journal of Material and Civil Engineering, 6(4), 543-468.
Mander, JB., Priestly, M.J.N.,and Park, R. (1988). “Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete”, Journal of structural Engineering, ASCE, 114(8), 1804-1826.
McLean, D. I., and Buckingham, G. C. (1994). “Seismic Performance of Bridge Columns with Interlocking Spiral Reinforcement.” Report No. WA-RD 357.1, Washington State Transportation Center, Washington, USA, 41 pp.
Mlakar, P.F., Dusenberry, D.O., Harris, J.R., Haynes, G., Phan., L.T. and Sozen, M.A. (2005). “Description of structural damage caused by the terrorist attack on the Pentagon”, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 197-205.
MOI. (2011). Design Specifications for Concrete Structures, Ministry of the Interior, Taiwan.
Monti, G., and Nuti, C. (1992). “Nonlinear cyclic behavior of reinforcing bars including buckling.” Journal of structural Engineering, ASCE, 118(12), 3268-3284.
MOTC. (2008). Seismic Bridge Design Specifications, Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Taiwan.
Murphy, L.M. (1973). “San Fernando, California, Earthquake of February 9, 1971,” Department of Commerce, Washington, D. C, USA.
Nilson, A. H., Darwin, D., and Dolan, C. W. (2010). “Design of Concrete Structures,” 14th Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 795 pp.
Park, R., and Paulay, T. (1975). “Reinforced Concrete Structures.” John Wiley and Sons, New York-London-Sydney-Toronto.
Priestley, M. J. N., Verma, R., and Xiao, Y. (1994). “Seismic Shear Strength of Reinforced Concrete Columns,” Journal of the Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 120, No. 8, pp. 2310-2329.
Razvi, S. R., and Saatcioglu, M. (1999). “Confinement model for high-strength concrete.” Journal of structural Engineering, ASCE, 125(3), 281-289.
Saatcioglu, M., and Razvi, S. R. (1992). “Strength and ductility of confined concrete.” Journal of structural Engineering, ASCE, 118 (6) 1590-1607.
Sezen, H. (2002). “Seismic Behavior and Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Building Columns,” PhD Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California.
Sezen, H., and Moehle, J. P. (2004). “Shear Strength Model for Lightly Reinforced Concrete Columns,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 130, No. 11, pp. 1692-1703.
Tanaka, H., and Park, R. (1993). “Seismic Design and Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Interlocking Spirals,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 90, No. 2, pp. 192-203.
Weng, C. C., Yin, Y. L., Wang, J. C, and Liang, C. Y. (2008). “Seismic cyclic loading test of SRC columns confined with 5-spirals”. Sci China Ser E-Tech Sci, 51(5), pp.529-555.
Wight, J. K., and MacGregor, J. G. (2012). “Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design,” 6th Edition, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458, 1157 pp.
Yin, S. Y. L., Wang, J. C., and Wang, P. H. (2012). “Development of Multi-spiral Confinements in Rectangular Columns for Construction Automation,” Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, V. 35, No. 3, pp. 309-320.
Yin, S. Y. L., Wu, T. L., Liu, T. C., Sheikh, S. A., and Wang, R. (2011). “Interlocking Spiral Confinement for Rectangular Columns,” ACI Concrete International, V. 33, No. 12, pp. 38-45.