Advertisement

Strengthening of RC Buildings with Steel Elements

  • J. M. Castro
  • M. Araújo
  • M. D’Aniello
  • R. Landolfo
Chapter
Part of the Building Pathology and Rehabilitation book series (BUILDING, volume 9)

Abstract

Existing reinforced concrete (RC) buildings often need some strengthening interventions due to different reasons, such as change in usage, repair of visible damage or seismic strengthening. Nowadays, few guidelines and codes that specifically addressing this issue are available in Europe, even though a wide range of research activities and scientific literature is available. As a result, the lack of clarity and guidance from current codes leads most practitioners to rely on their engineering judgment and to resort to assessment procedures that are conceptually suitable to the design of new structures, rather than to the assessment of existing ones. Hence, this chapter aims at providing a brief discussion on the assessment procedures most commonly adopted by practitioners and at clarifying the adequacy of such approaches. Moreover, building on the manifold applications and versatility of steel, the use of steel elements in the strengthening of existing RC buildings is herein addressed. A number of strengthening techniques, from traditional to more innovative solutions, are presented alongside with a brief discussion on the relevant issues characterizing their design and performance.

Keywords

RC buildings Local and global strengthening Steel elements Innovative dissipative systems 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Part of this work reports to research financially supported by Project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007457—CONSTRUCT—Institute of R&D in Structures and Construction, funded by FEDER funds through COMPETE2020—Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalização (POCI) and by national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT).

References

  1. 1.
    Romão X, Penna A. Code-based procedures for seismic safety assessment and retrofit. In: Costa A, Arêde A, Varum V, editors. Strengthening and retrofitting of existing structures. Building pathology and rehabilitation. Berlin: Springer; 2017.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rodriguez M, Park R. Repair and strengthening of reinforced concrete buildings for seismic resistance. Earthq Spectra. 1991;3(7):439–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    CEN. ENV 1998-3 Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 3: assessment and retrofitting of buildings. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization; 2005.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Araújo M, Castro JM. On the quantification of local deformation demands and adequacy of linear analysis procedures for the seismic assessment of existing steel buildings to EC8-3. Bull Earthq Eng. 2016;14(6):1613–1642.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Romão X, Delgado R, Guedes J, Costa A. A comparative application of different EC8-3 procedures for the seismic safety assessment of existing structures. Bull Earthq Eng. 2010;8:91–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Romão X, Gonçalves R, Costa A, Delgado R. Evaluation of the EC8-3 confidence factors for the characterization of concrete strength in existing structures. Mater Struct. 2012;45(11):1737–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Franchin P, Pinto PE, Rajeev P. Confidence factor? J Earthq Eng. 2010;14(7):989–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pinto PE. The Eurocode 8—part 3: the new European code for the seismic assessment of existing structures. Asian J Civ Eng. 2005;6(5):447–56.MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    D’Aniello M. Steel dissipative bracing systems for seismic retrofitting of existing structures: theory and testing. Ph.D. dissertation, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Naples; 2007.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sousa R, Castro JM. Seismic design of RC frames retrofitted with concentric steel braces. In: Mazzolani F, Herrera R, editors. STESSA 2012: behaviour of steel structures in seismic areas. London: Taylor and Francis; 2012.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Varum H. Seismic assessment, strengthening and repair of existing buildings. Ph.D. dissertation, Universidade de Aveiro, Aveiro; 2003.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Varum H, Dias-Teixeira F, Marques P, Pinto AV, Bhatti AQ. Performance evaluation of retrofitting strategies for non-seismically designed RC buildings using steel braces. Bull Earthq Eng. 2013;11(4):1129–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    RFCS. Steel solutions for seismic retrofit and upgrade of existing constructions (Steelretro). Brussels: Research Found for Coal and Steel; 2013.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    FEMA. FEMA 547 Techniques for the seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. Washington: Federal Emergency Management Agency; 2006.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Asteris PG, Chronopoulos MP, Chrysostomou CZ, Varum H, Plevris V, Kyriakides N, Silva V. Seismic vulnerability assessment of historical masonry structural systems. Eng Struct. 2014;62–63:118–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Furtado A, Rodrigues H, Varum H, Costa A. Evaluation of different strengthening techniques’ efficiency for a soft storey building. Eur J Environ Civ Eng. 2015;. doi: 10.1080/19648189.2015.1119064.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Silva V, Crowley H, Varum H, Pinho R, Sousa L. Investigation of the characteristics of Portuguese regular moment-frame RC buildings and development of a vulnerability model. Bull Earthq Eng. 2015;13(5):1455–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Searer GR, Paret TF, Freeman SA. ASCE-31 and ASCE-31: what good are they? In: Proceedings of the ASCE Structures Congress; 2008.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Paret TF, Searer GR, Freeman SA. ASCE 31 and 41: Apocalypse now. In: Proceedings of the ASCE Structures Congress; 2011.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    ASCE. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings (ASCE/SEI 41-13). Reston: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Araújo M, Castro JM. A critical review of European and American provisions for the seismic assessment of existing steel moment-resisting frame buildings. J Earthq Eng. 2017;. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2016.1277568.
  22. 22.
    CEN. ENV 1998-1 Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 1: general rules, seismic action and rules for buildings. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization; 2004.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    RSA. Regulamento de Segurança e Acções. Decreto-Lei nº 235/83. Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional – Casa da Moeda; 1983 (in Portuguese).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    CEN. ENV 1992-1-1 Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures. Part 1-1: general rules and rules for buildings. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization; 2004.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Romão X, Delgado R, Costa A. Practical aspects of demand and capacity evaluation of RC members in the context of EC8-3. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2010;39(5):473–99.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fardis MN. Seismic design, assessment and retrofitting of concrete buildings based on EN-Eurocode 8. In: Ansal A, editor. Geotechnical, geological and earthquake engineering. Berlin: Springer; 2010.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Peres R, Castro JM. Comparison of European and American approaches for consideration of P-Δ effects in seismic design. In: Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering; 2010.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Landolfo R, Cascini L, Portioli F. Sustainability of steel structures: towards an integrated approach to life-time engineering design. Front Archit Civ Eng China. 2011;5(3):304–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kappos A, Dimitrakopoulos E. Feasibility of pre-earthquake strengthening of buildings based on cost-benefit and life-cycle cost analysis with the aid of fragility curves. Nat Hazards. 2008;45(1):33–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Liel A, Deierlein G. Cost-benefit evaluation of seismic risk mitigation alternatives for older concrete frame buildings. Earthq Spectra. 2013;29(4):1391–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    FIB. Seismic assessment of retrofit of reinforced buildings. Lausanne: Fédération Internationale du Bétion; 2003.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Aykac S, Kalkan I, Aykac B, Karahan S, Kayar S. Strengthening and repair of reinforced concrete beams using external steel plates. J Struct Eng. 2013;139(6):929–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Oehlers DJ. Reinforced concrete beams with plates glued to their soffits. J Struct Eng. 1992;188(8):2023–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Leung CKY. Delamination failure in concrete beams retrofitted with a bonded plate. J Mater Civ Eng. 2001;13(2):106–13.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zhang J, Teng J, Wong Y, Lu Z. Behaviour of two-way RC slabs externally bonded with steel plate. J Struct Eng. 2001;127(4):390–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Siu WH, Su RKL. Effects of plastic hinges on partial interaction behaviour of bolted side-plated beams. J Constr Steel Res. 2010;66(5):622–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Su RKL, Siu WH, Smith ST. Effects of bolt-plate arrangements on steel plate strengthened reinforced concrete beams. Eng Struct. 2010;32(6):1769–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Su RKL, Zhu Y. Experimental and numerical studies of external steel plate strengthened reinforced concrete coupling beams. Eng Struct. 2005;27(10):1547–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Monitorul Oficial al României. Cod de proiectare seismică—Partea A III-A—Prevederi pentru evaluarea seismică a clădirilor existente. Indicativ P 100-3/2008. Bucureşti: Ministerul Dezvoltării Regionale şi Locuinţei; 2009 (in Romanian).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Aboutaha RS, Engelhardt MD, Jirsa JO, Kreger ME. Retrofit of concrete columns with inadequate lap splices by the use of rectangular steel jackets. Earth Spectra. 1996;12(4):693–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Montuori R, Piluso V. Reinforced concrete columns strengthened with angles and battens subjected to eccentric load. Eng Struct. 2009;31(2):539–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Giménez E, Adam JM, Ivorra S, Calderón PA. Full-scale testing of axially loaded RC columns strengthened by steel angled and strops. Adv Struct Eng. 2009;12(2):169–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Giménez E, Adam JM, Ivorra S, Calderón PA. Influence of strips configuration o the behaviour of axially loaded RC columns strengthened by steel angles and strips. Mater Des. 2009;30(10):4103–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Adam JM, Giménez E, Calderón PA, Ivorra S. Experimental study of beam-column joints in axially loaded RC columns strengthened by steel angles and strips. Steel Compos Struct. 2008;8(4):329–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Garzón-Roca J, Ruiz-Pinilla J, Adam JM, Caderón PA. An experimental study on steel-caged RC columns subjected to axial force and bending moment. Eng Struct. 2011;33(2):580–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    CEN. ENV 1994-1-1 Eurocode 4: design of composite steel and concrete structures. Part 1-1: general rules and rules for buildings. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization; 2004.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Nagaprasad P, Sahoo DR, Rai DC. Seismic strengthening of RC columns using external steel cage. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2009;38(14):1563–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wang L, Su RKL. Theoretical and experimental study of plate-strengthened concrete columns under eccentric compression loading. J Struct Eng. 2013;139(3):350–9.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Said A, Nehdi M. Rehabilitation of RC frame joints using local steel bracing. Struct Infrastruct Eng. 2008;4(6):431–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Youssef MA, Ghaffarzadeh H, Nehdi M. Seismic performance of RC frames with concentric internal steel bracing. Eng Struct. 2007;29(7):1561–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Massumi A, Tasnimi AA. Strengthening of low ductile reinforced concrete frames using steel x-bracings with different details. In: Proceedings of the 14th World conference on earthquake engineering; 2008.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ozcelik R, Binici B. A case study of strengthening of deficient RC building with internal steel frame. In: Papadrakakis M, Fragiadakis M, Plevris, editors. 3rd ECCOMAS thematic conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering; 2011.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Maheri MR, Hadjipour A. Experimental investigation and design of steel brace connection to RC frame. Eng Struct. 2003;25(13):1707–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ishimura M, Sadasue K, Miyauchi Y, Yokoyama T, Fujii T, Minamo K. Seismic performance evaluation for retrofitting steel brace of existing RC buildings with low-strength concrete. In: Proceedings of the 15th World conference on earthquake engineering; 2012.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Della Corte G, Fiorino L, Mazzolani FM. Lateral-loading tests on a real RC building including masonry infill panels with and without FRP strengthening. J Mater Civ Eng. 2008;20(6):419–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    D’Aniello M, Della Corte G, Mazzolani FM. Experimental tests of a real building seismically retrofitted by special buckling-restrained braces. In: Proceedings of the American Institute of Physics (from Seismic Engineering Conference Commemorating the 1908 Messina and Reggio Calabria Earthquake 2008), Part: Part 1-2, vol. 1020; 2008, p. 1513–1520.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Mazzolani FM. Innovative metal systems for seismic upgrading of RC structures. J Constr Steel Res. 2008;64(7–8):882–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mazzolani FM, Della Corte G, D’Aniello M. Experimental analysis of steel dissipative bracing systems for seismic upgrading. J Civ Eng Manag. 2009;15(1):7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Della Corte G, D’Aniello M, Landolfo R. Field testing of all-steel buckling-restrained braces applied to a damaged reinforced concrete building. J Struct Eng. 2014;141(1):D4014004. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    De Matteis G, Formisano A, Mazzolani FM. An innovative methodology for seismic retrofitting of existing RC buildings by metal shear panels. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2009;38(1):61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Popov EP, Engelhardt MD. Seismic eccentrically braced frames. J Constr Steel Res. 1988;10:321–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Della Corte G, D’Aniello M, Landolfo R. Analytical and numerical study of plastic overstrength of shear links. J Constr Steel Res. 2013;82:19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lin PC, Tsai KC, Chang CA, Hsiao YY, Wu AC. Seismic design and testing of buckling-restrained braces with a thin profile. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2015;. doi: 10.1002/eqe.2660.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Takeuchi T, Ozaki H, Tasui R, Sutcu F. Out-of-plane stability of buckling-restrained braces including moment transfer capacity. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2013;43(6):851–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    NIST. Seismic design of steel buckling-restrained braced frames. A guide for practicing engineers. NIST GCR 15-917-34. Gaithersburg: National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce; 2015.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Formisano A, Mazzolani FM, De Matteis G. Numerical analysis of slender steel shear panels for assessing design formulas. Int J Struct Stab Dyn. 2007;7(2):273–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Formisano A, Mazzolani FM. On the selection by MCDM methods of the optimal system for seismic retrofitting and vertical addition of existing buildings. Comput Struct. 2015;159:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. M. Castro
    • 1
  • M. Araújo
    • 1
  • M. D’Aniello
    • 2
  • R. Landolfo
    • 2
  1. 1.CONSTRUCT-LESE, Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Department of Structures for Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of Naples “Federico II”NaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations