{"title":"根据欧洲规范 8,带有封闭式玻璃钢护套的钢筋混凝土构件的抗剪性能","authors":"Dionysis Biskinis, Michael N. Fardis","doi":"10.1007/s10518-024-02000-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The shear resistance computed using Annex J of Part 1–1 of Generation 2 of Eurocode 2—on strengthening of RC members for static loads with externally-bonded Fibre-reinforced-polymers (FRPs)—exceeds by about 25% on average the cyclic shear resistance of 64 FRP-jacketed shear-critical RC specimens in the international literature. The semi-empirical cyclic shear resistance approach for FRP-wrapped RC members in Annex A of Part 3 of Generation 1 of Eurocode 8 is in good average agreement with the results of these tests, but conflicts with the rational, mechanics-based approach for shear resistance against static actions in Generation 2 of Eurocode 2, which has already been adopted in Generation 2 of Eurocode 8 for members without FRP jackets, adapted to the specific needs of seismic design. This latter approach is modified and extended to cover RC members with closed FRP jackets in a more technically sound way than in Annex J of Generation 2 of Eurocode 2. The new approach fits the available cyclic test results without bias or lack-of-fit with respect to the key variables controlling cyclic shear resistance, gives slightly better accuracy than the semi-empirical one in Generation 1 of Eurocode 8 and does much better in correctly identifying as not failing in shear FRP-wrapped RC members which have failed in flexure or not failed at all during cyclic testing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":9364,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering","volume":"22 13","pages":"6359 - 6377"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shear resistance of RC members with closed FRP jacket for Eurocode 8\",\"authors\":\"Dionysis Biskinis, Michael N. Fardis\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10518-024-02000-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The shear resistance computed using Annex J of Part 1–1 of Generation 2 of Eurocode 2—on strengthening of RC members for static loads with externally-bonded Fibre-reinforced-polymers (FRPs)—exceeds by about 25% on average the cyclic shear resistance of 64 FRP-jacketed shear-critical RC specimens in the international literature. The semi-empirical cyclic shear resistance approach for FRP-wrapped RC members in Annex A of Part 3 of Generation 1 of Eurocode 8 is in good average agreement with the results of these tests, but conflicts with the rational, mechanics-based approach for shear resistance against static actions in Generation 2 of Eurocode 2, which has already been adopted in Generation 2 of Eurocode 8 for members without FRP jackets, adapted to the specific needs of seismic design. This latter approach is modified and extended to cover RC members with closed FRP jackets in a more technically sound way than in Annex J of Generation 2 of Eurocode 2. The new approach fits the available cyclic test results without bias or lack-of-fit with respect to the key variables controlling cyclic shear resistance, gives slightly better accuracy than the semi-empirical one in Generation 1 of Eurocode 8 and does much better in correctly identifying as not failing in shear FRP-wrapped RC members which have failed in flexure or not failed at all during cyclic testing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering\",\"volume\":\"22 13\",\"pages\":\"6359 - 6377\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10518-024-02000-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10518-024-02000-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Shear resistance of RC members with closed FRP jacket for Eurocode 8
The shear resistance computed using Annex J of Part 1–1 of Generation 2 of Eurocode 2—on strengthening of RC members for static loads with externally-bonded Fibre-reinforced-polymers (FRPs)—exceeds by about 25% on average the cyclic shear resistance of 64 FRP-jacketed shear-critical RC specimens in the international literature. The semi-empirical cyclic shear resistance approach for FRP-wrapped RC members in Annex A of Part 3 of Generation 1 of Eurocode 8 is in good average agreement with the results of these tests, but conflicts with the rational, mechanics-based approach for shear resistance against static actions in Generation 2 of Eurocode 2, which has already been adopted in Generation 2 of Eurocode 8 for members without FRP jackets, adapted to the specific needs of seismic design. This latter approach is modified and extended to cover RC members with closed FRP jackets in a more technically sound way than in Annex J of Generation 2 of Eurocode 2. The new approach fits the available cyclic test results without bias or lack-of-fit with respect to the key variables controlling cyclic shear resistance, gives slightly better accuracy than the semi-empirical one in Generation 1 of Eurocode 8 and does much better in correctly identifying as not failing in shear FRP-wrapped RC members which have failed in flexure or not failed at all during cyclic testing.
期刊介绍:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering presents original, peer-reviewed papers on research related to the broad spectrum of earthquake engineering. The journal offers a forum for presentation and discussion of such matters as European damaging earthquakes, new developments in earthquake regulations, and national policies applied after major seismic events, including strengthening of existing buildings.
Coverage includes seismic hazard studies and methods for mitigation of risk; earthquake source mechanism and strong motion characterization and their use for engineering applications; geological and geotechnical site conditions under earthquake excitations; cyclic behavior of soils; analysis and design of earth structures and foundations under seismic conditions; zonation and microzonation methodologies; earthquake scenarios and vulnerability assessments; earthquake codes and improvements, and much more.
This is the Official Publication of the European Association for Earthquake Engineering.