Advertisement

Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 473–495 | Cite as

Diaphragm effectiveness of precast concrete structures with cladding panels under seismic action

  • Bruno Dal Lago
  • Silvia Bianchi
  • Fabio Biondini
Original Research
  • 97 Downloads

Abstract

The seismic performance of precast frame structures strongly depends on the mechanical devices connecting both structural and non-structural elements. Following recent post-earthquake field observations of unintended seismic interaction of the cladding panels with the frame structure, the seismic design of the cladded system is currently being critically examined by the scientific community. Design solutions involving a controlled cladding–structure interaction have been proposed to address this problem. However, the frame–panel interaction may draw high stresses into the roof diaphragm, as a consequence of the stiffening of the external frames only. This paper presents a parametric study based on linear and non-linear dynamic analyses investigating different levels of interaction among frames, panels, and diaphragm system. The results show how the deck and cladding connections influence the seismic behaviour of the structure. Innovative fastening systems aimed at enhancing the seismic performance of the structure are proposed based on the use of dissipative connection devices inserted into both cladding and deck components.

Keywords

Precast structures Mechanical connections Dissipative devices Diaphragm action Seismic performance Non-linear analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work presented in this paper has been carried out with the financial support of the Italian Department of Civil Protection (DPC) and the Italian Laboratories University Network of Earthquake Engineering (ReLUIS) within the research program DPC-ReLUIS 2014–2016.

References

  1. Babič A, Dolšek M (2016) Seismic fragility functions of industrial precast building classes. Eng Struct 118:357–370Google Scholar
  2. Belleri A (2017) Displacement based design for precast concrete frames with not-emulative connections. Eng Struct 141:228–240Google Scholar
  3. Belleri A, Torquati M, Riva P (2014) Seismic performance of ductile connections between precast beams and roof elements. Mag Conc Res 66(11):553–562Google Scholar
  4. Belleri A, Brunesi E, Nascimbene R, Pagani M, Riva P (2015a) Seismic performance of precast industrial facilities following major earthquakes in the Italian Territory. J Perform Constr Facil 29(5):04014135Google Scholar
  5. Belleri A, Torquati M, Riva P, Nascimbene R (2015b) Vulnerability assessment and retrofit solutions of precast industrial structures. Earthq Struct 8(3):801–820Google Scholar
  6. Belleri A, Torquati M, Marini A, Riva P (2016) Horizontal cladding panels: in-plane seismic performance in precast concrete buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 14(4):1103–1129Google Scholar
  7. Belleri A, Marini A, Riva P, Nascimbene R (2017) Dissipating and re-centring devices for portal-frame precast structures. Eng Struct 150:736–745Google Scholar
  8. Belleri A, Cornali F, Passoni C, Marini A, Riva P (2018) Evaluation of out-of-plane seismic performance of column-to-column precast concrete cladding panels in one-storey industrial buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 47(2):397–417Google Scholar
  9. Belletti B, Gasperi A, Spagnoli A (2015) Capacity design-based seismic forces in floor-to-beam connections of precast concrete frames. ASCE J Perform Constr Facil 29(6):04014161Google Scholar
  10. Biondini F, Toniolo G (2009) Probabilistic calibration and experimental validation of the seismic design criteria for one-storey concrete frames. J Earthq Eng 13:426–462Google Scholar
  11. Biondini F, Toniolo G, Tsionis G (2010) Capacity design and seismic performance of multi-storey precast structures. Eur J Environ Civil Eng 14(1):11–28Google Scholar
  12. Biondini F, Titi A, Toniolo G (2012) Pseudodynamic tests and numerical simulations on a full-scale prototype of a multi-storey precast structure. In: 15th world conference on earthquake engineering (15WCEE), Lisbon, Portugal, September 24–28, 2012, Paper No. 1468Google Scholar
  13. Biondini F, Dal Lago B, Toniolo G (2013a) Role of wall panel connections on the seismic performance of precast structures. Bull Earthq Eng 11(4):1061–1081Google Scholar
  14. Biondini F, Dal Lago B, Toniolo G (2013b) Diaphragm action in precast structures with cladding wall panels. In: 15th Italian congress on earthquake engineering (ANIDIS 2013), June 30–July 4, 2013, PaduaGoogle Scholar
  15. Bournas DA, Negro P, Molina FJ (2013a) Pseudodynamic tests on a full-scale 3-storey precast concrete building: behaviour of the mechanical connections and floor diaphragms. Eng Struct 57:609–627Google Scholar
  16. Bournas D, Negro P, Taucer F (2013b) Performance of industrial buildings during the Emilia earthquakes in Northern Italy and recommendations for their strengthening. Bull Earthq Eng 12(5):2383–2404Google Scholar
  17. Brunesi E, Nascimbene R, Bolognini D, Bellotti D (2015) Experimental investigation of the cyclic response of reinforced precast concrete frames structures. PCI J 2:57–79Google Scholar
  18. Buratti N, Minghini F, Ongaretto E, Savoia M, Tullini N (2017) Empirical seismic fragility for the precast RC industrial buildings damaged by the 2012 Emilia (Italy) earthquakes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46(4):2317–2335Google Scholar
  19. Casotto C, Silva V, Crowley H, Nascimbene R, Pinho R (2015) Seismic fragility of Italian RC precast industrial structures. Eng Struct 94:122–136Google Scholar
  20. Dal Lago B, Ferrara L (2016) Efficiency of mechanical floor connections on the diaphragm action of precast concrete floor/roof decks. In: 14th international symposium on structural engineering, vol 1, Beijing, pp 469–476Google Scholar
  21. Dal Lago B, Lamperti Tornaghi M (2018) Sliding channel cladding connections for precast structures subjected to earthquake action. Bull Earthq Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0410-0 Google Scholar
  22. Dal Lago B, Molina FJ (2018) Assessment of a capacity spectrum design approach against cyclic and seismic experiments on full-scale precast RC structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 47(7):1591–1609Google Scholar
  23. Dal Lago B, Toniolo G, Lamperti Tornaghi M (2016) Influence of different mechanical column-foundation connection devices on the seismic behaviour of precast structures. Bull Earthq Eng 14(12):3485–3508Google Scholar
  24. Dal Lago B, Biondini F, Toniolo G (2017a) Friction-based dissipative devices for precast concrete panels. Eng Struct 147:356–371Google Scholar
  25. Dal Lago B, Biondini F, Toniolo G, Lamperti Tornaghi M (2017b) Experimental investigation on the influence of silicone sealant on the seismic behaviour of precast façades. Bull Earthq Eng 15(4):1771–1787Google Scholar
  26. Dal Lago B, Muhaxheri M, Ferrara L (2017c) Numerical and experimental analysis of an innovative lightweight precast concrete wall. Eng Struct 137:204–222Google Scholar
  27. Dal Lago B, Toniolo G, Felicetti R, Lamperti Tornaghi M (2017d) End support connection of precast roof elements by bolted steel angles. Struct Concr 18(5):755–767Google Scholar
  28. Dal Lago B, Biondini F, Toniolo G (2018a) Experimental investigation on steel W-shaped folded plate dissipative connectors for precast cladding panels. J Earthq Eng 22(5):778–800Google Scholar
  29. Dal Lago B, Biondini F, Toniolo G (2018b) Experimental tests on multiple-slit devices for precast concrete panels. Eng Struct 167:420–430Google Scholar
  30. Dal Lago B, Biondini F, Toniolo G (2018c) Seismic performance of precast concrete structures with energy dissipating cladding panel connection systems. Struct Concr.  https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201700233 (invited paper) Google Scholar
  31. Dal Lago B, Negro P, Dal Lago A (2018d) Seismic design and performance of dry-assembled precast structures with adaptable joints. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 106:182–195Google Scholar
  32. Dei Poli S, di Prisco M, Gambarova PG (1992) Shear response, deformations, and subgrade stiffness of a dowel bar embedded in concrete. ACI Struct J 89(6):665–675Google Scholar
  33. Demartino C, Vanzi I, Monti G, Sulpizio C (2017) Precast industrial buildings in Southern Europe: loss of support at frictional beam-to-column connections under seismic actions. Bull Earthq Eng 16(1):259–294Google Scholar
  34. EN 1998-1:2004 (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  35. Ercolino M, Bellotti D, Magliulo G, Nascimbene R (2018) Vulnerability analysis of industrial RC precast buildings designed according to modern seismic codes. Eng Struct 158:67–78Google Scholar
  36. Ferrara L, Toniolo G (2008) Design approach for diaphragm action of roof decks in precast concrete buildings under earthquake. In: Walraven J, Stoelhorst D (eds) fib Symposium “Taylor made concrete structures”, Amsterdam, pp 963–968Google Scholar
  37. Fib (2010) Model code for concrete structures. Fédération Internationale du Béton/International Federation for Structural Concrete, LausanneGoogle Scholar
  38. Fischinger M, Kramar M, Isakovic T (2008) Cyclic response of slender RC columns typical of precast industrial buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 6:519–534Google Scholar
  39. Fleischman RB, Farrow KT (2001) Dynamic response of perimeter lateral-system structures with flexible diaphragms. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 30(5):745–763Google Scholar
  40. Fleischman RB, Farrow KT (2003) Seismic design recommendations for precast concrete diaphragms in long floor span constructions. PCI J 11–12:46–62Google Scholar
  41. Fleischman RB, Naito C, Restrepo J, Sause R, Ghosh SK (2005a) Seismic design methodology for precast concrete diaphragms, part 1: design framework. PCI J 50(5):68–83Google Scholar
  42. Fleischman RB, Naito C, Restrepo J, Sause R, Ghosh SK, Wan G, Schoettler M, Cao L (2005b) Seismic design methodology for precast concrete diaphragms, part 2: research program. PCI J 50(6):14–31Google Scholar
  43. G + D Computing (2010) Using Strand7 (Straus7)—Introduction to the Strand7 finite element analysis system, Ed. 3, Strand7 Pty LimitedGoogle Scholar
  44. Kramar M, Isakovic T, Fischinger M (2010) Seismic collapse risk of precast industrial buildings with strong connections. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39:847–868Google Scholar
  45. Magliulo G, Ercolino M, Manfredi G (2014a) Influence of cladding panels on the first period of one-story precast buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 13(5):1531–1555Google Scholar
  46. Magliulo G, Ercolino M, Petrone C, Coppola O, Manfredi G (2014b) Emilia earthquake: the seismic performance of precast RC buildings. Earthq Spectra 30(2):891–912Google Scholar
  47. Magliulo G, Ercolino M, Cimmino M, Capozzi V, Manfredi G (2015) Cyclic shear test on a dowel beam-to-column connection of precast buildings. Earthq Struct 9(3):541–562Google Scholar
  48. Magliulo G, Cimmino M, Ercolino M, Manfredi G (2017) Cyclic shear tests on RC precast beam-to-column connections retrofitted with a three-hinged steel device. Bull Earthq Eng 15(9):3797–3817Google Scholar
  49. Metelli G, Beschi C, Riva P (2011a) Cyclic behaviour of a column-to-foundation joint for concrete precast structures. Eur J Env Civ Eng 15(9):1297–1318Google Scholar
  50. Metelli G, Bettini N, Plizzari G (2011b) Experimental and numerical studies on the behaviour of concrete sandwich panels. Eur J Env Civ Eng 15(10):1465–1481Google Scholar
  51. Muciaccia G, Di Nunzio G, Consiglio A (2017) Behaviour of mono-stud plates in cracked concrete under shear loading. In: 3rd international symposium on connections between steel and concrete (ConSC 2017), September 27–29, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  52. Negro P, Lamperti Tornaghi M (2017) Seismic response of precast structures with vertical cladding panels: the SAFECLADDING experimental campaign. Eng Struct 132:205–228Google Scholar
  53. Negro P, Bournas DA, Molina FJ (2013) Pseudodynamic tests on a full-scale 3-storey precast concrete building: global response. Eng Struct 57:594–608Google Scholar
  54. Orlando M, Piscitelli LR (2018) Experimental investigation on static and cyclic behaviour of flanged unions for precast reinforced concrete columns. Eur J Env Civ Eng 22(8):927–945Google Scholar
  55. Palanci M, Senel SM, Kalkan A (2017) Assessment of one story existing precast industrial buildings in Turkey based on fragility curves. Bull Earthq Eng 15(1):271–289Google Scholar
  56. Pollini AV, Buratti N, Mazzotti C (2018) Experimental and numerical behaviour of dissipative devices based on carbon-wrapped steel tubes for the retrofitting of existing precast RC structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 47(5):1270–1290Google Scholar
  57. Priestley MJN, Sritharan S, Conley JR, Pampanin S (1999) Preliminary results and conclusions from the PRESSS five-story precast concrete test building. Spec Rep PCI J 44(6):42–67Google Scholar
  58. Psycharis IN, Mouzakis HP (2012a) Assessment of the seismic design of precast frames with pinned connections from shaking table tests. Bull Earthq Eng 10(6):1795–1817Google Scholar
  59. Psycharis IN, Mouzakis HP (2012b) Shear resistance of pinned connections of precast members to monotonic and cyclic loading. Eng Struct 41:413–427Google Scholar
  60. Psycharis IN, Kalyviotis IM, Mouzakis HP (2018) Experimental investigation of the response of precast concrete cladding panels with integrated connections under monotonic and cyclic loading. Eng Struct 159:75–88Google Scholar
  61. Saisi A, Toniolo G (1999) Precast RC columns under cyclic loading: an experimental programme oriented to EC8. Stud Res Polit Milano 19:373–414Google Scholar
  62. Sargin M, Handa VK (1969) A general formulation for the stress-strain properties of concrete. Solid Mech Div 3:1–27Google Scholar
  63. Savoia M, Buratti N, Vincenzi L (2017) Damages and collapses in industrial precast buildings after the 2012 Emilia earthquake. Eng Struct 137:162–180Google Scholar
  64. Schoettler MJ, Belleri A, Zhang D, Restrepo JI, Fleischman RB (2009) Preliminary results of the shake-table testing for the development of a diaphragm seismic design methodology. PCI J 54(1):100–124Google Scholar
  65. Schultz AE, Tadros MK, Huo XM, Magaña RA (1994) Seismic resistance of vertical joints in precast shear walls. In: 12th FIP Congress, Fédération Internationale de la Précontrainte (International Federation for Prestressing), May 29–June 2, 1994, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  66. Scotta R, De Stefani L, Vitaliani R (2015) Passive control of precast building response using cladding panels as dissipative shear walls. Bull Earthq Eng 13:3527–3552Google Scholar
  67. Sorace S, Terenzi G (2017) Existing prefab R/C buildings: seismic assessment and supplemental damping-based retrofit. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 94:193–203Google Scholar
  68. Takeda T, Sozen MA, Nielsen NN (1970) Reinforced concrete response to simulated earthquakes. ASCE J Struct Div 96(12):2557–2573Google Scholar
  69. Titi A, Biondini F (2014) Probabilistic seismic assessment of multistory precast concrete frames exposed to corrosion. Bull Earthq Eng 12(6):2665–2681Google Scholar
  70. Titi A, Biondini F, Toniolo G (2018) Seismic assessment of existing precast structures with dry-friction beam-to-column joints. Bull Earthq Eng 16(5):2067–2086Google Scholar
  71. Toniolo G, Colombo A (2012) Precast concrete structures: the lesson learnt from L’Aquila earthquake. Struct Conc 13(2):73–83Google Scholar
  72. Toniolo G, Dal Lago B (2017) Conceptual design and full-scale experimentation of cladding panel connection systems of precast buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46(14):2565–2586Google Scholar
  73. Tsoukantas SG, Tassios TP (1989) Shear resistance of connections between reinforced concrete linear precast elements. ACI Struct J 86(3):242–249Google Scholar
  74. Tullini N, Minghini F (2016) Grouted sleeve connections used in precast reinforced concrete construction—experimental investigation of a column-to-column joint. Eng Struct 127:784–803Google Scholar
  75. Valente M (2013) Improving the seismic performance of precast buildings using dissipative devices. In: 2nd ICRMCE, vol 54, pp 795–804Google Scholar
  76. Vintzeleou EN, Tassios TP (1987) Behavior of dowels under cyclic deformations. ACI Struct J 84(1):18–30Google Scholar
  77. Yuksel E, Karadoğan F, Bal E, Ilki A, Bal A, Inci P (2015) Seismic behavior of two exterior beam-column connections made of normal-strength concrete developed for precast construction. Eng Struct 99:157–172Google Scholar
  78. Yuksel E, Karadoğan F, Ozkaynak H, Khajehdei A, Güllü A, Smyrou E, Bal IE (2017) Behaviour of steel cushions subjected to combined actions. Bull Earthq Eng 16(2):707–729Google Scholar
  79. Zoubek B, Fischinger M, Isakovic T (2015) Estimation of the cyclic capacity of beam-to-column dowel connections in precast industrial buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 13(7):2145–2168Google Scholar
  80. Zoubek B, Fischinger M, Isaković T (2016) Cyclic response of hammer-head strap cladding-to-structure connections used in RC precast buildings. Eng Struct 119:135–148Google Scholar
  81. Zoubek B, Fischinger M, Isaković T (2018) Seismic response of short restrainers used to protect cladding panels in RC precast buildings. J Vib Control 24(4):645–658Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringPolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations