Title:
Seismic Performance of Concrete Columns with Innovative Seven- and Eleven-Spiral Reinforcement
Author(s):
Yu-Chen Ou, Si-Huy Ngo, Hwasung Roh, Samuel Y. Yin, Jui-Chen Wang, and Ping-Hsiung Wang
Publication:
Structural Journal
Volume:
112
Issue:
5
Appears on pages(s):
579-592
Keywords:
columns; confinement; cyclic; ductility; multi-spiral; seismic; transverse reinforcement
DOI:
10.14359/51687706
Date:
9/1/2015
Abstract:
This research proposes innovative seven- and 11-spiral transverse reinforcement to replace two- and six-spiral reinforcement, respectively, to decrease spiral size to address the issue of spiral fabrication in large columns. Moreover, this research proposes using large reinforcing bars or H-shaped steel as longitudinal reinforcement to reduce the potential of reinforcing bar cage failure. The objectives of this research were to investigate the seismic performance of seven- and 11-spiral columns and the effect of using large reinforcing bars and H-shape steel as longitudinal reinforcement. Cyclic tests of columns showed that seven- and 11-spiral columns, even with
less amounts of transverse reinforcement, exhibited higher ductility capacities than tied columns. The use of H-shaped steel as longitudinal reinforcement increased ductility and energy dissipation of the column. Among ACI 318, Caltrans BDS, and Caltrans SDC methods to estimate probable moment strength, only the Caltrans SDC method produced conservative results for all columns examined.
Related References:
1. Tanaka, H., and Park, R., “Seismic Design and Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Interlocking Spirals,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 90, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1993, pp. 192-203.
2. Correal, J. F.; Saiidi, M. S.; Sanders, D.; and El-Azazy, S., “Shake Table Studies of Bridge Columns with Double Interlocking Spirals,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 104, No. 4, July-Aug. 2007, pp. 393-401.
3. McLean, D. I., and Buckingham, G. C., “Seismic Performance of Bridge Columns with Interlocking Spiral Reinforcement,” Report No. WA-RD 357.1, Washington State Transportation Center, Seattle, WA, 1994, 41 pp.
4. Igase, Y.; Nomura, K.; Kuroiwa, T.; and Miyagi, T., “Seismic Performance and Construction Method of Bridge Columns with Interlocking Spiral/Hoop Reinforcement,” Concrete Journal, V. 40, No. 2, Feb. 2002, pp. 37-46. doi: (in Japanese)10.3151/coj1975.40.2_37
5. Wu, T.-L.; Ou, Y.-C.; and Yin, S. Y. L.; Wang, J.-C.; Wang, P.-H.; and Ngo, S.-H., “Behavior of Oblong and Rectangular Bridge Columns with Conventional Tie and Multi-Spiral Transverse Reinforcement under Combined Axial and Flexural Loads,” Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, V. 36, No. 8, Dec. 2013, pp. 980-993. doi: 10.1080/02533839.2012.747047
6. California Department of Transportation, “Bridge Design Specifications,” Engineering Service Center, Earthquake Engineering Branch, Sacramento, CA, Sept. 2003, pp. 8-1 to 8-58.
7. California Department of Transportation, “Seismic Design Criteria Version 1.6,” Engineering Service Center, Earthquake Engineering Branch, Sacramento, CA, Nov. 2010, 160 pp.
8. Yin, S. Y. L.; Wu, T. L.; Liu, T. C.; Sheikh, S. A.; and Wang, R., “Interlocking Spiral Confinement for Rectangular Columns,” Concrete International, V. 33, No. 12, Dec. 2011, pp. 38-45.
9. Ou, Y. C.; Ngo, S. H.; Yin, S. Y.; Wang, J. C.; and Wang, P. H., “Shear Behavior of Oblong Bridge Columns with Innovative Seven-Spiral Transverse Reinforcement,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 111, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2014, pp. 1339-1349.
10. MOTC, 2008, “Seismic Bridge Design Specifications,” Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Taiwan, 2008. (in Chinese)
11. Builes-Mejia, J. C., and Itani, A., “Stability of Bridge Column Rebar Cages during Construction,” Report No. CCEER-10-7, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada, 2010, 236 pp.
12. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary,” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2011, 503 pp.
13. ACI Committee 374, “Acceptance Criteria for Moment Frames Based on Structural Testing and Commentary (ACI 374.1-05),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2005, 9 pp.
14. FEMA 356, “Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings,” Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2000, 518 pp.
15. Chopra, A. K., Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1995, 729 pp.
16. Mander, J. B.; Priestley, M. J. N.; and Park, R., “Theoretical Stress-Strain Model for Confined Concrete,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 114, No. 8, 1988, pp. 1804-1826. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)