12.07.2015 Views

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

3.3 Methods <strong>of</strong> RepairThe method <strong>of</strong> repair required to restore a component to its original, pre-earthquakecondition, provides a basis for estimating the economic impact <strong>of</strong> earthquake loading.Information was collected from multiple sources to identify appropriate techniquesfor repairing earthquake damage to RC components and to link these repair methodswith the range <strong>of</strong> previously identified damage states. The primary referencesconsulted were FEMA 308 Repair <strong>of</strong> Earthquake Damaged Concrete and MasonryWall Buildings (ATC 1998) and ACI 546R-96 Concrete Repair Guide (ACI Com. 5461996). In addition, the results <strong>of</strong> previous research by others were used to verify theadequacy <strong>of</strong> repair methods and to identify which repair methods would be employedfor which damage states (Karayannis 1998, Filiatrault and Lebrun 1996, Tasai 1992,Jara et al. 1989). Additionally, practicing engineers and contractors were consulted toverify linkages between repair methods and damage states (C<strong>of</strong>fman and Kapur 2003,Runacres 2003, Savage 2003).Review <strong>of</strong> the relevant sources results in identification <strong>of</strong> five methods <strong>of</strong> repairthat would be appropriate for restoring joints to original condition (Table 3). Thesemethods <strong>of</strong> repair include five basic repair techniques: repair cosmetic finishes, epoxyinject concrete cracks, patch spalled concrete, remove and replace crushed concrete,replace reinforcing steel. Review <strong>of</strong> the relevant sources also provided a basis forlinking these methods <strong>of</strong> repair with specific damage states (Table 3). While theprobabilistic framework employed for prediction <strong>of</strong> economic impact (Eq. 1) wouldsuggest that there should be a probabilistic relationship linking each repair methodwith a set <strong>of</strong> damage states, there are insufficient data available to calibrate suchmodels.Table 3. Methods <strong>of</strong> repair for jointsMethod <strong>of</strong> RepairActivitiesDamageStates0. Cosmetic Repair Replace and repair finishes. 0-21. Epoxy Injection Inject cracks with epoxy and replace finishes. 3-52. Patching Patch spalled concrete, epoxy inject cracks and 6-8replace finishes.3. Replace Concrete Remove and replace damaged concrete, replaces 9-11finishes4. Replace Joint Replace damaged reinforcing steel, remove andreplace concrete, and replace finishes.124. PREDICTION OF REQUIRED REPAIR METHODUsing the experimental data collected as well as the damage states and methods <strong>of</strong>repair identified from the literature, a series <strong>of</strong> fragility curves were developed for use215

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!