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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

1 / (Stiff / Init. Stiff.)8070605040302010Loading brancha (γ max) 4 + b γ max+ 1a = 1 x 10 9b = 100030252015105Unloading brancha (γ max) 4 + b γ max+ 1a = 1 x 10 8b = 600000 0,005 0,01 0,015 0 0,005 0,01 0,015Maximum drift ratio (γ max ) Maximum drift ratio (γ max )Figure 4. Normalized stiffness degradation curves for the loading and unloadingbranches.The serviceability limit state is associated to the onset <strong>of</strong> masonry inclinedcracking, which typically occurs at drift angle <strong>of</strong> the order <strong>of</strong> 0,15%. Such value isquite variable, depending upon the type <strong>of</strong> masonry unit, wall flexural-to-shearcapacity ratio, among other factors. Evidently, at this state, damage is minor. For thereparability limit state, it was decided to associate it to the formation <strong>of</strong> the fullinclined cracking, and the penetration <strong>of</strong> such cracking into TC ends. It has beenobserved in the lab that the residual crack width at such limit state is <strong>of</strong> the order <strong>of</strong> 2mm, and that a drift angle is approximately 0,25%. The safety limit state correspondsto wall shear strength, typically characterized by large masonry cracks (with aresidual width <strong>of</strong> 5 mm) and considerable damage at TC ends. Damage in TC occursin the form <strong>of</strong> yielding <strong>of</strong> TC longitudinal reinforcement due to shearing and onset <strong>of</strong>cracking crushing and spalling.Performance criteria presented in Table 1 were developed keeping in mind theneed for repair <strong>of</strong> a masonry structure after a moderate-to-severe event (reparabilitylimit state). In this regard, three basic repair methods were considered: injection <strong>of</strong> anadhesive component (epoxy or Portland cement-based materials); jacketing (mortaroverlays reinforced with welded wire meshes, or composite overlays); and placement<strong>of</strong> additional horizontal reinforcing bars within mortar joints. Rehabilitationtechniques where made consistent with the damage and structural response (Fig. 5).239

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!