Assessment of the seismic behaviour of RC columns

Vintzileou, E; Stathatos, A

dc.contributor.author	Vintzileou, E	en
dc.contributor.author	Stathatos, A	en
dc.date.accessioned	2014-03-01T01:25:57Z
dc.date.available	2014-03-01T01:25:57Z
dc.date.issued	2007	en
dc.identifier.issn	0141-0296	en
dc.identifier.uri	https://dspace.lib.ntua.gr/xmlui/handle/123456789/17842
dc.subject	Code provisions	en
dc.subject	Confinement	en
dc.subject	Ductility	en
dc.subject	Force response degradation	en
dc.subject	Seismic behaviour	en
dc.subject	Spacing of hoops	en
dc.subject.classification	Engineering, Civil	en
dc.subject.other	Axial loads	en
dc.subject.other	Building codes	en
dc.subject.other	Cyclic loads	en
dc.subject.other	Ductility	en
dc.subject.other	Reinforced concrete	en
dc.subject.other	Seismic design	en
dc.subject.other	Confinement ratios	en
dc.subject.other	Force response degradation	en
dc.subject.other	Columns (structural)	en
dc.subject.other	Axial loads	en
dc.subject.other	Building codes	en
dc.subject.other	Columns (structural)	en
dc.subject.other	Cyclic loads	en
dc.subject.other	Ductility	en
dc.subject.other	Reinforced concrete	en
dc.subject.other	Seismic design	en
dc.subject.other	building code	en
dc.subject.other	concrete structure	en
dc.subject.other	cyclic loading	en
dc.subject.other	ductility	en
dc.subject.other	reinforced concrete	en
dc.subject.other	seismic design	en
dc.subject.other	seismic response	en
dc.title	Assessment of the seismic behaviour of RC columns	en
heal.type	journalArticle	en
heal.identifier.primary	10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.07.002	en
heal.identifier.secondary	http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.07.002	en
heal.language	English	en
heal.publicationDate	2007	en
heal.abstract	Current codes for earthquake resistant design of RC structures include several provisions that ensure satisfactory behaviour of columns. In order to check the efficiency of relevant code provisions, the behaviour exhibited by tested RC columns is assessed. For this purpose, experimental results on more than 450 RC columns were collected. Their behaviour has been evaluated on the basis of several parameters, namely: the in-section arrangement of hoops, the effective confinement ratio, the spacing of hoops normalized to the longitudinal bar diameter, etc. The main findings of this comparison between experimental results and code provisions are presented in this paper. The present work confirms the beneficial role of multiple hoops, low axial load, high confinement ratios and low values of the spacing of hoops normalized to the diameter of longitudinal bars on limiting the force response degradation due to cycling, as well as on enhancing the ductility of RC columns. In general, code provisions seem to ensure the targeted behaviour. (C) 2007 Published by Elsevier Ltd.	en
heal.publisher	ELSEVIER SCI LTD	en
heal.journalName	Engineering Structures	en
dc.identifier.doi	10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.07.002	en
dc.identifier.isi	ISI:000247755500004	en
dc.identifier.volume	29	en
dc.identifier.issue	7	en
dc.identifier.spage	1296	en
dc.identifier.epage	1311	en