Use of Hybrid Simulation Results for More Credible Collapse Risk Assessment

Abstract eng:
Collapse risk assessment of structures requires non-linear analytical models calibrated to representative experimental results, which can ideally capture the realistic collapse behaviour of structures. These analytical models, however, are often calibrated to the results from uniaxial quasi-static cyclic or monotonic tests with constant axial load, whereas many important factors that influence the response of a collapsing structure are ignored. Hybrid simulation can be used as an improved alternative to realistically apply complex time-varying boundary effects on structural components and as a result leads to more credible estimates of the collapse probability of structures. The primary objective of this paper is to conduct a comparative study to investigate the use of quasi-static (QS) versus hybrid simulation (HS) test results for collapse risk assessment of reinforced concrete (RC) structures. For this purpose, two identical limited-ductile RC columns were tested by the respective experimental methods using a state-of-the-art Multi-Axis Substructure Testing (MAST) system capable of controlling all six-degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) boundary conditions in mixed load and deformation modes. A comparative collapse risk assessment was then conducted that highlights the significant discrepancies in the estimates of collapse probability if QS test results are used for the calibration of modelling parameters.

• Export as: BibTeX | MARC | MARCXML | DC | EndNote | NLM | RefWorks
• Add to your basket