Part-3-Enn Redesign and Stregthening Applications

Part 3
Redesign and strengthening applications
3.1 School building Strengthening of shear walls foundation
3.1
SCHOOL BUILDING STRENGTHENING OF SHEAR WALLS

FOUNDATION
During the Athens 1999 earthquake, cracks were formed in beams ending to
large shear walls, as well as beams along the perimeter, between twin columns.
It is clear that the buildings lateral deformation was larger than expected,
according to the available walls stiffness. Structural analysis of the existing
building showed that the foundation of the walls was insufficient (shallow
footings of inadequate size Fig. 3.3). The shear walls have been subjected to
rocking, which lead to the shear-flexural deformation of the beams (Fig. 3.1).
Figure 3.1 Damage, as indicated by the method of Push Over analysis
The proposed solution required strengthening of the foundation (increase of

width and depth, Fig. 3.3) to ensure the fixing of the shear walls into the soil. In
cases where the walls were connected to basement perimeter walls, local
strengthening had to be applied. In order to connect the walls with the new
foundation and bear the increased stress at their bottom, the walls of the ground
floor were to be strengthened using one-sided 25 cm reinforced concrete
jackets (Fig. 3.2).
231
3. Redesign and strengthening applications
616 1220
616 1220
Vertical reinforcement 16/15

on both sides

on both sides
2420
Figure 3.2 Ground floor wall strengthening
The strengthening of the foundations was realized through firstly excavating

below both ends and completing the corresponding parts of new foundation,
and afterwards excavating the middle part and completing the whole foundation
(Fig. 3.3). The problem was avoiding settlements during construction and
finishing the works in time due to the limited available margin (40 days). More
than one subcontractor was employed, working at the same time. Cast in situ
concrete was used for the foundation strengthening (Fig. 3.3) and shotcrete was
used for the walls jacketing. (Fig. 3.2, Fig. 3.7).
1 Concreting stage
+3.60
1st FLOOR
STRENGTHENING
1
1 Concreting stage
GROUND FLOOR
H=3.12 m
0.00
-3.20
B Concreting stage
2 Concreting stage
SECTION 1-1
Fig. 3.3 Excavation below the foundation as part of the strengthening process
232
For the Push-Over analysis of the existing structure, the foundation had to be
modeled as an element capable of plastic rotation under formation of partial
uplift. The analysis revealed that plastic hinges would initially appear at the
bottom of the foundation of walls, as well as the ground floor (Fig. 3.1). Then,
the shear failures of the beams ending to the walls and to the perimetral beams
followed, while perimetral columns exhibited plastic rotation exceeding the
acceptable limits.
Load factor
SCHOOL BUILDING
=0.16 - SOIL CLASS B - DIRECTION(Y)
Displ.=0.076
l=0.100
0.386
Elastic Point
d=0.067
l=0.327
T=0.7085
0.327
Target Point
d=0.076
l=0.100
0.100
0.091
0.0758
0.0669
0.0238
0.0143
0.054
Displacement (m)
Figure 3.4 Push Over curve of the existing building
After the strengthening (Fig. 3.5) the building was analysed again using the
Push Over method that indicated the full restraint of the walls to their
foundation, resulting to strength increase and respective decrease of inelastic
deformations.
The buildings resistance to lateral loads was almost tripled (Fig. 3.6), leading to
the decrease of the required ductility of the system and to the reduction of the
expected inelastic deformations caused by the areas accordant design
earthquake, within acceptable limits. The works were precisely executed within
the anticipated time.
233
Figure 3.5 Walls and foundation strengthening in order to decrease inelastic deformations
Load factor
SCHOOL BUILDING
=0.16 - SOIL CLASS B - DIRECTION(Y)
Displ.=0.060
l=0.316
Elastic Point
d=0.060
l=0.364
T=0.6377
0.386
0.364
0.360
0.316
Target Point
d=0.060
l=0.316
0.144
0.0602
0.0603
0.0239
0.0143
0.086
Displacement (m)
Figure 3.6 Push Over curve of the strengthened building
234
Figure 3.7 One-sided wall strengthening reinforcements
This example is typical for lack of strength, not stiffness. The main reason for
the strength insufficiency (R=3.2) is the deficient foundation, and secondarily
the inadequate strength of walls close to their bottom. The deformation
mechanism occurred early and resulted to the increase of inelastic deformations
of the buildings beams and columns, and damages from an occasional
earthquake minor to the design level. Strengthening resulted to a lower degree
of strength ratio (R=1.1) and practically to the minimization of inelastic
deformations.
The technical conclusion is that large scale underpinning is possible if the
parameters of soil, construction and method of intervention are correctly
managed.
3.2
Higher education buildings Adding of shear walls
This is a complex of 5 buildings separated with expansion joints. The buildings

were not seriously damaged by the Athens 1999 earthquake, but the use of the
buildings had to change from industrial to educational. The new use required
extended demolition and new constructions. Among them, practically all
masonries contributing to the strength and stiffness of the very flexible
reinforced concrete frame had to be demolished. The upgrade of the complex
should comply with current regulations, which required increase of earthquake
resistance and stiffness. The solution proposed the addition of walls and cores
with proper foundations, connected with the existing diaphragms of the slabs.
This solution fully complied with the architectural proposal for the redesign,
which included new elevators and several staircases, adequately arranged in
each individual buildings plan (Fig. 3.8). It should be emphasized, that in such
cases the close cooperation of the Architect and the Structural Engineer is
235
indispensable, even at the early stages of the preliminary study. Otherwise, it

will be impossible to find a satisfactory strengthening solution for the structure.
For each building, walls or cores were provided in at least two positions. These
were L-, U- shaped, rectangular, or a combination of the previous with more
webs (Fig. 3.8). Special attention was paid for the new structures to enclose
existing columns at their ends or corners. The webs axes were placed on the
existing axes grid in order to also enclose the slab beams. The enclosure of the
beams was either two-sided (full enclosure) or one-sided (Fig. 3.15, 3.17). For
this purpose, new webs were required to be 40 cm thick, while existing vertical
members were enclosed in jackets. This approach offered a very good
connection with the existing structure.
0
2 0 /4
0
20/5
d=11
0
20/5
K18 (40/35)
d=11
0
20/5
20/5
d=11
5
25/8
d=11
20/5
0
20/5
d=11
5
20/5
d=11
0
2 0 /5
25/8
d=11
d=11
K14 (40/35)
d=11
20/5
d=11
d=11
0
20/5
20/5
K13 (40/35)
d=11
0
20/5
20/5
d=11
d=11
0
2 0 /5
25/8
20/5
5
25/8
d=11
0
20/5
K19 (40/35)
d=11 K12 (40/35)
0
20/5
5
25/8
d=11
d=11
0
20/5
d=11
0
20/5
20/5
d=11
K9 (40/35)
0
20/5
Figure 3.8 Integration of cores in the existing grid
The foundation of walls and cores was constructed anew with footings and
foundation beams of large dimensions (Fig. 3.9), connected with the
neighbouring through connection beams. The diaphragm slab of the ground
storey floor was reconstructed, contributing to the fixity of the new vertical
members (Fig. 3.10).
236
3.2 HIGHER EDUCATION BUILDINGS ADDING OF SHEAR WALLS
Many other local strengthening interventions were also necessary. Among them
was the construction of an inverted beam with special dampers in the vicinity of
two buildings with different floor levels.
Figure 3.9 Foundation of new walls
Figure 3.10 Reconstruction of the slab on soil
Load factor
The pre- and post- strengthening behaviour analysis was realized using the
Push Over method (Fig. 3.12). It was proved that the lateral force resistance of
existing buildings was extremely low, i.e. 2 to 3% of the seismic weight (Fig.
3.11).
0.396
SCHOOL BUILDING
=0.16 - SOIL CLASS B - DIRECTION ()
Displ.=0.193
l=0.027
0.277
Elastic Point
d=0.198
l=0.109
T=2.1736
0.109
Target Point
d=0.193
l=0.027
0.1976
0.027
Displacement (m)
Figure 3.11 Push Over curve of an existing building
237
LOCATING SEISMIC FAILURES WITH PUSH OVER METHOD
EDUCATIONAL BUILDINGS STRENGTHENING WITH NEW SHEAR WALLS
Figure 3.12 Before strengthening

Figure 3.13 After strengthening
238
3.2 HIGHER EDUCATION BUILDINGS ADDING OF SHEAR WALLS
Load factor
The only exception was a recently built part, with a resistance of approximately
10% of its seismic weight, which showed also inadequate behaviour and
extended damages. The strengthening intervention lead to an elastic behaviour
of the building when exposed to the design earthquake (Fig. 3.14). Its lateral
force resistance increased approximately to 40% of its seismic weight with no
indication of damage. Additionally, the new members presented elastic
behaviour under the design earthquake. The inelastic deformations of the
existing members were reduced to minimum, and were within the acceptable
limits. The expected total roof displacements were decreased 5 to 7 times,
protecting the structure from risk of damages.
0.544
Target Point
d=0.030
l=0.393
0.0248
0.0295
0.0300
0.326
Elastic Point
d=0.029
l=0.396
T=0.4412
0.0413
0.396
0.393
SCHOOL BUILDING
=0.16 - SOIL CLASS B - DIRECTION()
Displ.=0.030
l=0.393
Displacement (m)
Figure 3.14 Push Over curve of the strengthened building
The construction combined the use of cast in situ concrete and shotcrete (Fig.
3.18). In many cases composite steel and concrete members were formed
(integration of steel members, Fig. 3.16).
Existing walls were necessary to be strengthened with shotcrete. New openings
were formed in slabs and the appropriate strengthening measures were taken.
The works were executed in a perfect way, although it was an extremely
complicated and, in many aspects, pioneering project.
239
Figure 3.15 Beam integrated in the wall
Figure 3.16 Composite steel and concrete

columns
Figure 3.17 New wall
Figure 3.18 New elevator shaft core
This example is a typical case of lack of strength and stiffness. Members

capable to undertake seismic forces are practically absent. The inelastic
deformations of columns and beams exceeded the safety limits, and the total
displacement of the building would lead to damages of both structural and nonstructural elements even under a relatively small-scale earthquake. The fact
that the building did not suffer serious damage from the Athens 1999
earthquake is due to the contribution of masonries to stiffness and resistance.
The strengthening with walls and cores was practically the only appropriate
solution, presuming of course, a proper foundation. It should be emphasized
that no columns, beams or slabs were strengthened in this case. This resulted
to the decrease of construction costs and time. The addition of the new
members changes the flow of forces, resulting to a decrease of loads applied to
existing members, and a consequent decrease of inelastic deformations during
an earthquake.
240
3.3 Office building addition of cores
3.3
Office building addition of cores
There are two individual office buildings separated by a joint. They consist of 2
basements, ground floor, 1st and 2nd storey, and they are located relatively close
to the epicentre of Athens 1999 earthquake. The structure of one of the
buildings is formed of vertical members in the perimeter (columns and 2 small
L-shaped walls), while the other building has an internal staircase ring core with
insufficient thickness and reinforcement. A common characteristic of both
buildings is the relatively long span (~ 20 m) of the prestressed concrete ribbed
slab in the roof of the ground floor, as well as the 1st and 2nd floor. The Athens
1999 earthquake caused significant inelastic deformations resulting to cracks on
the perimeter beams, columns and X-shaped cracks in the perimeter masonries
(Fig. 3.19). Obviously, the presence of strong walls and cores in order to reduce
lateral displacements of the long spanned slabs (increased mass), is
imperative.
Figure 3.19 Push Over analysis damage indications
The proposed solution was the addition of two strong U shaped cores (Fig. 3.20
and 3.24) on the perimeter of each building. The existing columns or angle walls
were integrated at the ends of the cores, and the perimeter wall of the 1st and
2nd basement was integrated in the web of the cores.
241
5520
5520
4/m 2
Figure 3.20 Conventional concrete strengthening cores
20/10
20/10
20/10
10/10
Figure 3.21 C180 strengthening core (alternative)
The cores footings were added to the foundation and connected with existing
footings (Fig. 3.22, 3.23). The objective of strengthening was the prevention of
collapse even in case of a severe (very rare) earthquake, and the avoidance of
noticeable damage under the design earthquake.
Figure 3.22 Core foundation
Figure 3.23 Connection of cores with the

basements wall
For the mainly cast-in-situ concrete works, highly skilled staff was used for a
period of 60 days, in two independent local sites. During the works, the building
242
remained in full function due to the insulation of the areas of intervention with
protective panels in order to avoid noise and dust and assure the necessary
safety measures.
Figure 3.24 Strengthening with cores
Figure 3.25 Concreting of cores
For comparative reasons, an alternative strengthening solution with similarly

shaped cores at the same positions, using fiber reinforced ultra high strength
concrete, was examined (Fig. 3.21, 3.27). This solution resulted in much lower
243
Load factor
thickness of core walls. The conventional concrete core thicknesses varied from
70 to 95 cm. The assumed thickness of fiber reinforced concrete walls would be
approximately 20 cm.
OFFICE BUILDING
Displ.=0.014
l=0.343
Elastic Point
d=0.014
l=0.344
T=0.3277
0.344
0.343
0.0141
0.0144
Target Point
d=0.014
l=0.343
Displacement (m)
Load factor
Figure 3.26 Push Over curve of the building, strengthened with conventional concrete
0.344
Elastic Point
d=0.013
l=0.344
T=0.3094
OFFICE BUILDING
Displ.=0.024
l=0.155
0.241
0.155
0.0236
0.0126
Target Point
d=0.024
l=0.155
Displacement (m)
Figure 3.27 Push Over curve of the building, strengthened with C 180
244
Certainly, these two solutions are not entirely comparable. The comparison is
only interesting regarding the cost. The reason is that each solution is based on
different design principles. As far as conventional concrete is concerned, the
system remains elastic under the design earthquake, and even under a very
severe earthquake (Fig. 3.26), while in the case of ultra high strength concrete,
the development of plastic hinges at the bottom of the cores is allowed with the
condition that the inelastic deformations resulting from the design earthquake
are acceptable (Fig. 3.27). This approach leads to much lower reinforcement
ratios, and therefore lower construction cost and time.
This example concerns a building with prestressed slabs and vertical members
with very low ductility. The building should have elastic behaviour. The existing
members should practically only bear vertical loads, and the new cores should
bear the seismic loads. This explains the necessity of stiff and highly resistant
cores, which were easy to be constructed, because the intervention affected
only the external part of the building.
3.4
8-storey residential buildings addition

strengthening of ground floor columns
of
cores
and
Three 8-storey residential buildings with ground floor pilotis, which suffered
column failures (Fig. 3.28) from the Athens 1999 earthquake, and failure of the
ground floors lightly reinforced staircase walls, were strengthened.
Figure 3.28 Compressive shear failure of an open ground floor corner column
Furthermore, increased differential displacements from storey to storey

occurred, leading to extensive cracks in infill walls, spalling of wall tiles and
plaster, cracks in slabs and beams. The positions of longitudinal reinforcement
and stirrups were detected using a magnetoscopic method (Fig. 3.29).
245
Figure 3.29 Magnetoscopic image of transverse reinforcement
Load factor
The investigation detected that distances between stirrups ranged from 40 to

60 cm. In addition, the stirrups were not sufficiently anchored. Through
elastoplastic analysis, the capacity curve, i.e. the relation between roof
displacement and lateral load, was determined (Fig. 3.30 and 3.31).
RESIDENTIAL BUIDING
Displ.=0.114
l=0.150
0.312
0.166
Elastic Point
d=0.103
l=0.166
T=1.1267
0.150
Target Point
d=0.114
l=0.150
0.1143
0.1028
Brittle shear failure of a pilotis column
Displacement (m)
Figure 3.30 Pushover curve of the existing building after the addition of walls
For each earthquake level, the target displacement was calculated using the
DCM method (displacement coefficient method according to FEMA 273) and
the respective damage indication of structural members (Fig. 3.31) for each
load level. Comparing the theoretical damages corresponding to Athens 1999
246
3.4 8-Storey residential buildings-Addition of cores and strengthening of ground floor columns
earthquake with the actual damages, it is certainly convincing that this approach
seems to be a satisfactory approximation of the actual behaviour. Particularly
the pattern of plastic hinges and the order of their occurrence were
exceptionally interesting. For an earthquake similar to Athens 1999, the
decrease of shear strength of ground floor columns and of the staircase walls,
occurs after the development of plastic hinges, while for the design earthquake
(according to EAK 2000), additional plastic hinges and the development of soft
storey mechanism would occur, which would lead to a collapse.
Figure 3.31 Push Over analysis damage indications
The preferred solution was the addition of two 3.00x1.90 m cores along the
height of the building (approximately 30 m) in the middle of the balconies of two
opposite facades (Fig. 3.32 and 3.37).
To connect them with the existing structure and transfer the forces, the existing
slab of the floor of the ground storey was strengthened with additional cast-insitu concrete, increasing its depth (Fig. 3.33, 3.34, 3.5).
247
+29.77
+29.27
1(50X65)
7 (50X65)
22 (WALL)
5 (50X65)
+26.02
7th FLOOR
+22.77
6th FLOOR
+19.52
5th FLOOR
+16.27
4th FLOOR
+13.02
3rd FLOOR
+9.77
12 (35X65)
9 (35X65)
4 (20X60)
10 (35X65)
3 (20X85)
11
13 (20X85)
8 (50X65)
6 (100X30)
7 (20X60)
5 (100X30)
11 (20X60)
2 (50X65)
8th FLOOR
1
1 (20X85)
st
2 (20X85)
1 FLOOR
GROUND FLOOR
16 (35X65)
15 (35X120)
14 (35X65)
+6.52
+3.27
9 (50X65)
12
3 (50X65)
nd
2 FLOOR
+0.30 +0.15
+0.00
BASEMENT
8 (35X65)
6 (50X65)
-3.01
23 (WALL)
4 (50X65)
1
10 (50X65)
1
-5.01
Figure 3.32 Strengthening cores in plan and section
Figure 3.33 Open ground storey floor slab

strengthening
Figure 3.34 Core reinforcement in ground

floor and 1st floor
248
The foundation was increased with an additional footing (7.00x4.20 m and

2.00 m high) (Fig. 3.32) enclosing the existing one, which is connected with the
existing and with the basement wall with dowels. The cross section of the core
is hollow with 3 hollow spaces (50x70 cm) in the upper floors in order to reduce
weight (Fig. 3.36), while it is solid in the basement, where additional vertical
load for the foundation is necessary.
Figure 3.35 Connection of the core with the open ground storey floor diaphragm
1925
1925
2925
2925
25
25
25
12/10.0cm
12/10.0cm
12/10.0cm
2125
2125
12/10.0cm
2125
2125
Dowels 20/30, l=30 cm
Figure 3.36 Strengthening core with conventional concrete
In the cores cross section, a column is integrated using dowels. The connection
to the ground storey floor slab is effected through a steel beam where the
249
stirrups of the new slab are anchored (Fig. 3.35). The connection with the
balconies is effected through the existing cantilever reinforcements.
The advantages of this solution are:
Increase of stiffness and decrease of displacements and plastic
deformations, avoidance of the soft storey effect through a change of the
elastoplastic deformation mechanism (plastic hinges cannot develop on the
columns of ground floor).
Figure 3.37 Strengthening with cores, jackets and diaphragm slab
increase of the flexural strength of the building.
significant decrease of the shear forces in the columns.
few points of external interventions ensure that internal damage of the flats
is avoided
relatively easy connection with the existing diaphragms
easy, conventional construction of the new components with completely

controlled quality and cost
uniformly distributed stiffness and resistance along the height of the

building, avoiding thus concentration of deformations.
avoidance of sensitive methods of connection (chemical dowels, resins) at

critical positions
transparent and clear flow of forces from the point of application

(mass) to the soil.
250
strong fixity of the core to basement, through the connection with

basements ceiling diaphragm and the foundation
The columns and staircase walls of the ground floor (Fig. 3.38) that were
damaged where insufficient stirrups were detected, or where water pipes were
passing through the columns, causing significant damage, were strengthened
with shotcrete jackets (Fig. 3.39).
Figure 3.38 Open ground floor wall strengthening
Figure 3.39 Open ground floor

column jackets
There has been no anchoring of the additional longitudinal reinforcement at the

top and bottom end of the columns. As a result, the flexural strength of these
sections does not increase.
The results of the Push Over analysis are:
1. Decrease of displacement (Fig. 3.40).
2. The angular deformation is less than 0.5%, so that the damage in structural
and non-structural elements in case of a future earthquake is restricted
within acceptable limits.
3. Plastic hinges can now develop only in beams, and not in columns.
4. Column failures and collapse risk are eliminated.
Special care should be given to the architecture and the functionality of the
solution, when new elements are added. The new building should be neat,
harmonious, not giving the impression of a patchwork or of a construction
supporting a problematic structure. The building should not only keep, but also
increase its aesthetic, functional and economic value.
The first solution proposed by Architect N. Ktenas aims at the preservation of
the slab element on the core (Fig. 3.42).
251
Load factor
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
Displ.=0.105
l=0.164
0.312
Elastic Point
d=0.098
l=0.174
T=1.0737
0.174
0.164
0.0979
0.1048
Target Point
d=0.105
l=0.164
Displacement (m)
Load factor
Figure 3.40 Push Over curve of the building, strengthened with conventional
concrete, without the contribution of walls
0.312
0.306
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
Displ.=0.097
l=0.168
Elastic Point
d=0.093
l=0.183
T=1.0248
0.183
Target Point
d=0.0935
l=0.168
Displacement (m)
252
In every level, there is a projection of the slab starting from the external face of
the core (marquise), while balconies are connected with the core through
reinforced concrete parapets.
Figure 3.42 Preservation of the slab element on the face of the core (1st proposal)
The second proposal (Fig. 3.42), a more complex one construction-wise, has
horizontal prismatic shadowing elements that could be appropriately illuminated
during the night.
Figure 3.43 The core with horizontal prismatic elements (2nd proposal)
The third proposal (Fig. 3.44) presents the core as a vertical separating surface,
which is easy to construct, but includes an exposed concrete surface. None of
the proposals creates any functional problems, since the core separates the
253
balconies of adjacent independent flats, decreasing only the area of the balcony
surface by a relatively small percentage.
Figure 3.44 The core acts as a vertical separating surface (3rd proposal)
It should be emphasized that the additional cores could in many cases have a
bigger cross-section, in order to be accessible and functionally useful as
staircases, elevator shafts or storage rooms. Generally, an addition to a
building, if properly designed, maybe used to increase its protection against
earthquake risk.
The elastoplastic analysis for the investigation of the behaviour of the existing
building, revealed the significant influence of the masonries to the resistance
and deformation of the space model (Fig. 3.31). The modeling of the masonries
was effected through elastic diagonal friction members in the respective panels.
The evaluation of the Push Over analysis results lead to the conclusion that,
under the design earthquake, several columns of the open ground floor would
exhibit shear failure, and this could result to a total collapse. Under an
earthquake similar to Athens 1999 (occasional earthquake), the resulting
failures are minor to the formerly mentioned, a fact verified by the actual
damage. Analyzing the structure without the masonries would lead to wrong
conclusions regarding its behaviour.
The analysis of the building strengthened with cores showed that all the above
mentioned unfavourable effects are eliminated. Its stiffness is certainly
increased, and its resistance as well, but the way the structure deforms is also
different. New cores behave elastically under the design earthquake. There is
no more damage in the open ground storey, and absolutely no collapse risk,
even under a severe (very rare) earthquake.
254
For the purpose of comparison, an alternative (cores made of fiber reinforced

ultra high strength concrete), was investigated as well (Fig. 3.45). The resulting
width of the core walls was three times less, i.e. 12 cm instead of 40 cm, with
much lighter reinforcement.
20/10
20/10
12/10
12/10
20/10
Figure 3.45 Strengthening with C 180 cores (alternative)
The behaviour (stiffness, resistance and deformation) under the design

earthquake is similar (Fig. 3.41). The cores behave elastically and develop just
one plastic hinge at the bottom of the ground floor level. This solution could be
more cost-effective and easier to construct, and its mass would also be
reduced. Certainly, necessary experience on the application of the new
materials was not available at that time, and therefore the conventional solution
was preferred instead.
3.5
Office buildings addition of new cores and strengthening of the

existing ones
This is a 3 reinforced concrete office buildings complex with relatively big spans
(10 to 14 m) and coffered floor (waffle) slab of a depth of 70 cm. The buildings
neither had sufficient walls, nor masonries. They had a column system in
groups of four, 40x60 cm each, in a small distance (approximately 120 cm
spacing), forming a cross. This column system exhibited extremely
unfavourable behaviour during the Athens 1999 earthquake, because many
columns (approximately 19) suffered brittle shear failures due to the tension
shear combination of the frame action of the cross-combined columns.
Furthermore, due to the same earthquake, many cracks developed in slender
and lightly reinforced shear walls of the building cores. Fortunately, the building
255
that suffered the most column failures did not collapse (Fig. 3.48), since certain
vertical members endured and continued bearing the gravity loads. At the same
time, the building became flexible and escaped from its former high spectral
responses range. Probably, the main reason that the building was saved, was
the small duration of the above mentioned earthquake (approximately 7
seconds). Immediately after the earthquake, the building was provisionally
strengthened with steel frames and diagonal braces (Fig. 3.62), in order to be
protected from the aftershocks and remain safe during the retrofitting /
strengthening interventions.
From the study of the existing buildings structure and their dynamic behavior, it
became clear that the buildings were asymmetrical, and the distribution of mass
and stiffness along their height was not uniform. The diaphragms of the floors
exhibited not only translational, but also a significant degree of rotational
deformation. In similar cases, the redesign of the structure with extensive
addition of new members is necessary.
Figure 3.46 Push Over analysis damage indications of building A
256
3.5 Office buildings-addition of new cores and strengthening of the existing ones
Figure 3.47 Push Over analysis damage indications of building
Figure 3.48 Push Over analysis damage indications of building C
In the building (Fig. 3.48) with the extensive column failures with L-shaped plan,
two new cores were added: one internal (Fig. 3.49), and one external (Fig.
3.50), with the dimensions of 7.00x4.50 m and 7.00x7.60 m, correspondingly.
These cores are also functionally utilized. The internal core is used as an office
room and the external one as a staircase and elevator shaft.
257
Figure 3.49 Lighting openings in the internal

core
Figure 3.50 External core of the office building
The connection of the cores with the existing building in the basement (Fig.
3.51) is effected on one hand through the integration of the footing in a new one
with relatively large dimensions and on the other hand through doweling to the
walls and connection of basements ceiling diaphragm with the cores
diaphragm. The partial filling of the core with concrete in the basement was
necessary as additional weight, to ensure the development of compressive soil
stresses.
SECTION -
+0.00
BASEMENT
0.30
PLAIN CONCRETE
BASEMENT
3.65
3.85
3.65
DEBRIS
6.17
5.57
5.97
Figure 3.51 Core foundations connection with the existing building
The core cross sections are hollow, adequately reinforced and confined at their
ends and at the wall intersections (Fig. 3.52).
258
3622
3622
12/20
1222
2122
1222
2122
12/20
1222
1822
1822
1222
Jacket thickness 25 cm
3622
3622
Figure 3.52 Core strengthening with conventional concrete
20/10
C 180
C 180
20/10
20/10
Jacket thickness 7cm
20/10
Figure 3.53 Core strengthening with C 180 (alternative)
259
20/10
Figure 3.54 Internal core at the entrance of the office building
Load factor
The actual damages were fully verified by the elastoplastic-pushover analysis

for an equivalent with the Athens 1999 earthquake, i.e. an occasional
earthquake (Fig. 3.46, 3.47 and 3.48). In building C, 20 columns failed
theoretically instead of the 19 that actually failed, a fact that denotes a very
good approximation of the event.
OFFICE BUILDING
=0.16 - SOIL CLASS - DIRECTION()
Displ.=0.105
l=0.137
0.336
Elastic Point
d=0.105
l=0.280
T=0.9591
0.280
0.235
Target Point
d=0.105
l=0.137
0.137
0.1050
0.1052
Early shear failures
Displacement (m)
Figure 3.55 Push Over curve of the existing building
In the analysis, the plastic hinges developed in the columns that failed. The
drop of the shear resistance in the specific columns was the result of the frame
action and the one-sided removal of compressive load during the horizontal
260
Load factor
earthquake loading. Failures are also marked on the behaviour curve resulting
from the elastoplastic analysis (Fig. 3.55). After the strengthening, there is a
significant decrease of the displacement and an increase of the lateral
resistance (Fig. 3.56). No failures were observed in the old components of the
structure.
0.336
OFFICE BUILDING
=0.16 - SOPIL CLASS - DIRECTION()
Displ.=0.068
l=0.263
Target Point
d=0.068
l=0.263
0.0655
0.0676
0.263
Elastic Point
d=0.065
l=0.336
T=0.6920
Displacement (m)
Figure 3.56 Push Over curve of the building, strengthened with conventional concrete
Figure 3.57 Strengthening with cores
261
Load factor
0.336
Elastic Point
d=0.082
l=0.336
T=0.7757
OFFICE BUILDING
=0.16 - SOIL CLASS - DIRECTION()
Displ.=0.084
l=0.292
0.292
0.0823
0.0837
Target Point
d=0.084
l=0.292
Displacement (m)
The site was perfectly organized (Fig. 3.59) for the additional reason that the
works took place while the office building partially functioned. Safety measures,
supplies and transportation were perfectly controlled and checked daily.
Figure 3.59 Arrangement of the site
The foundation of the cores under the basement floors was constructed through
local excavations and dowelling to the existing components (Fig. 3.60).
262
The connection of the external shear wall to the perimeter wall of the basement
was effected after its strengthening with shotcrete and the addition of a new
footing to the existing one (Fig. 3.61).
Figure 3.60 Foundation of the internal core
Figure 3.61 Foundation of the external

shear wall basements wall
strengthening
For building C, where extensive failures led to its lateral stiffness reduction, the
provisional strengthening with steel elements was considered necessary (Fig.
3.62).
Figure 3.62 Provisional support measures increase of stiffness
The case of aftershocks should be kept in mind regarding the residual

resistance of the structure. The connection of the core to the basements ceiling
263
was achieved through the demolition of a part of the slab and the
reinforcements exposure (Fig. 3.63).
During every stage of the construction, preparatory works for the next slab were
simultaneously executed to avoid delays (Fig. 3.64).
Figure 3.63 Connection of the core to the basements ceiling
The demolition of the reinforced concrete balconies was often difficult, and
therefore a small rubber-tyred hammer was used (Fig. 3.65). The balcony
reinforcements are very suitable for the connection of the diaphragm to the
core, as they are usually long enough.
Figure 3.64 Demolitions exposure of the

slab reinforcement
Figure 3.65 Use of a rubber-tyred hammer
264
The core could be either made of exposed concrete, or covered by an external

cladding, or just plastered. Adequate openings were taken into account from the
very first stage of the design (Fig. 3.66).
Figure 3.66 Preparations for the 3rd floors formwork
The concreting underneath the solid regions was interrupted 15 cm lower. The
gap was later filled with fine aggregates of a maximum size of 15 mm. After
that, resin injections followed (Fig. 3.67).
SECTION ACROSS THE SPAN
FACE DEPTH >15cm

POSTERIOR POURING OF RESIN CONCRETE WITH MEDIUM GRAVEL
D=15mm
Figure 3.67 Connections with the waffle slab application of resin injections
At the connections of the diaphragm to the core, slab reinforcement was added
and anchored into the slab. Special care was given to the preservation of the
concrete cover (Fig. 3.68). In areas where the slab was solid, holes were drilled
265
and vertical reinforcement bars were put through, while the gaps were filled with
resin (Fig. 3.69).
Figure 3.68 Reinforcement arrangement at

the connections of the diaphragm
with the core
Figure 3.69 Holes in the solid slab

arrangement of longitudinal
reinforcement through the holes
Figure 3.70
Figure 3.71
Application of dowels, use of

epoxy resin
Arrangement of longitudinal
reinforcement between the ribs
Many waffles were annihilated and filled with concrete in order to increase the
diaphragms resistance where necessary. Dowels with epoxy resin were used
as well (Fig. 3.70).
The connection with the slab between the ribs has been realized through the
demolition of toppings of 7 cm depth only, and arrangement of the vertical bars
on both sides of the ribs (Fig. 3.71).
In conventional solid slabs, the thickness is usually smaller and creates no
problem. The problem appears usually in solid regions of waffle slabs.
266
In such complex strengthening interventions, the continuous presence of

experienced engineers is necessary, as well as frequent communication with
the designer in order to modify the construction details where they do not
comply with the actual conditions during the progress of the works (Fig. 3.72).
Figure 3.72 Continuous inspection

modification of details
Figure 3.73 Documentation of the construction

(drawings, photos)
There is no way to foresee the findings after a partial demolition during a repair
or strengthening, so a continuous process of adaptation to the actual conditions
is necessary. The construction stages should be sufficiently documented with
drawings and photos (Fig. 3.73).
Digital photos significantly facilitate the work, since they can be instantly
transmitted through electronic mail to the designer and other persons in charge.
The documentation is essential due to the frequent modifications on the initial
construction plans.
The cores were carefully reinforced and connected to the existing shell using
dowels. For buildings A and B, the proposal was the strengthening of the
existing thin-walled and lightly-reinforced cores, and the addition of a new
cylindrical cross-section in building B, to improve its torsional behaviour. The
solution of strengthening the existing cores with fibre-reinforced ultra high
strength C 180 concrete, was examined as well. The resulting thickness in this
case was 30% lower in comparison with the resulting thickness of the
conventional concrete and the corresponding reinforcement was much lower as
well (Fig. 3.53). The behaviour of the strengthened building analysed with the
Push Over method (Fig. 3.58) proved to be satisfactory, although the thickness
of the strengthening jackets was small. The reason why this option was not
chosen (after all), was the urgent character of the intervention and the lack of
experience in applications of ultra high strength concrete in our country in the
year 2000.
267
Epilogue
It is useful to draw some practical conclusions from these three parts of the book:
. Existing structures exhibit weak points in a significant extent. These are points of
increased vulnerability to a probable earthquake. These structures should be
redesigned and strengthened according to the current scientific knowledge. In some
extremely sensitive cases, immediate, relatively low cost measures that should be
taken are the following:
1. Columns strengthening through the jacketing of the wall-less ground-floor

(pilotis), turning them to composite columns. 3 to 5 mm steel jackets from the
top to the bottom of the columns, in a distance of 20 to 30 mm from the face of
the column, where thin, high strength slightly expansive mortar is injected,
may remove any danger of shear or compressive shear failure.
2. Modification of short columns to high strength composite columns, or filling the
spans on both sides with strong masonry.
3. Increase of stiffness and strength of flexible buildings, adding external
reinforced concrete walls or cores or steel structures. Walls filling the spans
made of strong masonry, or steel trusses vertically arranged one above the
other after the demolition of existing brick walls, may be constructed.
4. Strengthening the foundation connecting individual footings with a reinforced
concrete slab of appropriate depth. This is achieved through excavation of the
basement floor, the use of dowels to connect existing vertical members and
concreting the new foundation slab to avoid differential displacements and
rotation of individual footings, and respectively decreasing the deformations of
the superstructure.
5. Strengthening of the masonry walls with regular shotcrete or fiber-reinforced,
self-compacting, ultra high strength concrete jackets. This is usually the ideal
solution for stone walls, traditional buildings, or monuments that can be also
applied only from one side (internally or externally). The same solution is
applicable to the internal strengthening of basement perimeter stone walls.
269
6. Improvement of the rotational behavior of eccentric structures through the

addition of appropriately arranged stiff members. Such problems are usually
solved with external walls or cores connected with the slab diaphragms, or
even integrating existing perimeter vertical members.
7. Demolition and reconstruction of the elevator shaft and staircase walls of the
ground floor with reinforced concrete. Such measures also establish safe
escape routes in case of earthquake.
8. In cases of an extremely flexible ground floor with slender columns and no
walls, the addition of walls in order to increase the systems stiffness is
necessary. This is usually achieved through the connection of neighboring
columns with reinforced concrete walls integrating the existing columns. The
advantage of this approach is that no additional footings are required.
9. When the building has walls which are not sufficiently fixed to their bases, the
basement box should be strengthened, or their foundation should be
improved and connected with the adjacent footings. Walls and cores are
usually fixed at two levels (e.g. the foundation level and the roof of the
basement) through a couple of forces. If such an approach is not possible, it is
unavoidable to have footings of an increased depth.
10. Tension members, such as columns connected to frames, and beams out of
diaphragms, often exhibite shear failure. Such members should be located
and annihilated or strengthened. To annihilate them, means unification with
the neighboring, and strengthening is usually achieved through steel jackets.
. The application of certain earthquake resistant design principles for the new
buildings and for the redesign of existing ones are the long-term measures.
Unfortunately, several subjects are still not covered or not satisfactorily emphasized
by the Regulations. The following are necessary in order to produce an appropriate
solution.
1. Correct evaluation and proper classification of the subsoil conditions, in order
to use the corresponding design spectrum and provide the appropriate type of
foundation.
2. Obligatory provision of walls and cores sufficiently fixed at the basement or the
foundation, with proper dimension proportions (width, length, height),
adequate quantity and arrangement of reinforcement. Their area should be
proportional to the area of the oscillating storeys of the building.
270
3. Annihilation of short columns and beams. When their presence is necessary

for architectural reasons, they may be modified with hinges on both ends.
They cannot be used as earthquake resistant members due to the inherent
lack of ductility (objectively low shear ratio as).
4. Proper design of basement or ground floor boxes, through reinforced
concrete walls and diaphragms. The structures base should be nondeformable and resistant. Otherwise there are either considerable
deformations imposed at the superstructure, or the base fails, leading the
building to total collapse.
5. Ground plans, which are either symmetric, or even balanced against rotation.
The building should not be designed to be rotationally sensitive. Architectural
design should be executed, so that it will also result to a resistant and
appropriate structure. The form of the structure should be a part of the
architectural design.
6. Earthquake-resistant design based on displacements, i.e. to design the
necessary stiffness and strength members, setting limits to the deformations.
To achieve this, the displacement spectra for elastic or elastoplastic systems
should be properly applied, as well as the proper association of the systems
displacements to the members deformations. The latter is achieved through
elastoplastic (Push Over) analysis.
7. Design of ductile members with proper dimensional proportions according to
the expected stresses, and appropriate ratios of longitudinal and transverse
reinforcement for composite bending with compression, compressive shear,
flexural shear, rotation or curvature of the compression zone, punching etc.
8. Exclusion of brittle failure modes through proper design and use of high
strength materials, such as steel and ultra high strength concrete where
required. The design of super resistant columns, composite sections, confined
with steel jackets, steel columns or ultra high strength concrete columns,
mainly under compression, no flexural shear, are such examples. Low ratios of
longitudinal reinforcement and limited participation to the frame action are a
necessity. Use of steel members in regions of punching, steel sections in the
compressive zones of walls, steel coupling beams between walls, and
generally low ratios of flexural longitudinal reinforcement, is appropriate. Shear
cover overstrength of flexural members using transverse reinforcement where
required, and avoiding tensile stresses when flexural shear is present, is also
imperative.
271
9. Assure proper action of the diaphragms for the cooperation of all vertical
members. Provide top and bottom minimum reinforcement to the diaphragms,
avoid weak points, sufficient slab depths.
10. The design displacements of the building should be determined having in mind
not only the structural but the non structural members as well. Masonries,
faade elements, glass panels, ceiling fixtures or perimeter panels, suspended
elements or appendices, sheathing with marble or other artificial or natural
stones should be considered in regard to acceptable deformations, placing
tolerances and strength of the fixing system. Joints should also be adequately
formed respecting the expected displacements.
Finally, I would like to thank the esteemed collaborators and friends, as well as
the colleagues for the valuable discussions and continuous exchange of ideas,
the disagreements and agreements. They were the most important motive to write
this book besides the belief that we have to go on with no further delay with the
right interventions to face in practice the earthquake resistance of buildings.
272
References
PART 1
Elastoplastic analysis based on displacements

Pushover method
1. ATC 40 (November 1996) : Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete

buildings , Vol 1, California.
2. Bachmann H. (1998) : , .
.
3. Biggs J.M. (1964) : Introduction to Structural Dynamics , McGraw
Hill.
4. cubus Hellas Ltd (1998) : STATIK-3/ST
, .
Static and dynamic analysis of buildings, bridges and other space
structures software
5. cubus Hellas Ltd (2005) : STATIK-5
, .
Static and dynamic analysis of buildings, bridges and other space
structures software
6. FEMA 273 (October 1997) : NEHRP Guidelines for the seismic
rehabilitation of buildings, Washington, D.C.
7. FEMA 356 (2001) : NEHRP Guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of
buildings, Washington, D.C.
8. Priestley, Seible, Calvi (1996) : Seismic design and retrofit of bridges,
John Wiley & Sons.
9. 2003 : .
10. .... ( 2005) : ,
2.
11. , (1997) :
( 1980-1994),
.
12. . (1999) : Manual STATIK-3H,

, (Push
Over).
Kanellopoulos A, (1999): STATIK-3H manual, Static and dynamic
analysis of buildings, Pushover method

13. . (2005) : Manual STATIK-5H,
, (Push
Over).
273
Kanellopoulos A, (2005): STATIK-5H manual, Static and dynamic

analysis of buildings, Pushover method
14. . (2001) :
(Push Over) ,
287-288.
Kanellopoulos A. (2001): Earthquake resistant design of existing and
new structures using the Pushover method, Association of Greek Civil
Engineers bulletin No. 287-288
15. . (2001) :
(Push Over) , ,
284.
Kanellopoulos A. (2001): Strengthening of structures under seismic
loads, Association of Greek Civil Engineers bulletin No. 284
16. . (2004) : ,
...
17. SEAOC 99 (1999) : Recommended lateral force requirements and
commentary.
18. Schneider J. (1996) : Sicherheit und Zuverlssigkeit im Bauwesen,
B.G. Teubner Stuttgart.
19. Bachmann H. (1997) : Hochbau fr Ingenieure, B.G. Teubner
Stuttgart.
20. SIA / SGEB (September 1997) : Erdbebensicherung bestehender
Bauwerke und aktuelle Fragen der Baudynamik , D0145.
21. SIA / SGEB (1998) : Handlungsbedarf von Behrden, Hochschulen,
Industrie und Privaten zur Erdbebensicherung der Bauwerke in der
Schweiz , D0150.
22. SIA / SGEB (2000) : Erdbebenvorsorge in der Schweiz. Massnahmen
bei neuen und bestehenden Bauwerken , D0162.
23. SIA (2004) : berprfung bestehender Gebude bezglich Erdbeben,
Merkblatt 2018.
24. SIA (2005) : berprfung bestehender Gebude bezglich Erdbeben,
D0211.
25. . , . , . ,
. . (2002) :
/
,
.
Kanellopoulos A., Makrykostas E., Mystakides E., Papageorgiou E. and
Papakyriakopoulos P. (2002): Methods of strength under seismic
action evaluation of existing reinforced concrete buildings and bridges
274
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
improvement of seismic performance through technical

interventions, Earthquake Planning and Protection Organization
EC 8, European Standard, Draft No.6 Stage 49 (2003): Design of
structures for earthquake resistance , Central Secretary : rue de
Stassart 36, B1050, Brussels.
. (2001) :
, ,

, .
Kanellopoulos A. (2001): Earthquake resistance strengthening of
buildings adding walls, cores or steel members, International Scientific
two-day Meeting of Technical Chamber of Greece and Turkish Civil
Engineers Chamber Istanbul
. (2001) :
pilotis , 2o
, .
Kanellopoulos A. (2001): Preseismic verification method of ground
floor pilotis columns, 2nd Hellenic Earthquake resistant engineering
and technical seismology Congress, Salonica
. . (2001) :

, 2o
, .
Mystakides E. Kanellopoulos A. (2001) Reliability of the
displacement coefficient method for the simplified non-linear analysis of
structures, 2nd Hellenic Earthquake resistant engineering and
technical seismology Congress, Salonica
. (2001) :
.
. . (1995) :
, , .
Papazachos B. Papazachou C. (1997) : The Earthquakes of
Greece , editions Ziti, .
Chopra .. (2001) : Dynamics of structures, Practice Hall.
PART 2 Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete members

1. Kanellopoulos A. (1986) : Zum unelastischen Verhalten und Bruch von
Stahlbeton , -, Birkhaeuser Verlag, Basel-Boston-Stuttgart.
275
2. ., . (2006) :

, 15 .
Kanellopoulos A., Mystakides E. (2006): Ultra high performance
concrete applications in new structures or for the strengthening of
existing ones, 15th Concrete Congress
3. . , . (2006) :
/ ,
15 .
Kanellopoulos A., Dimitrakopoulos P. (2006): Design of ultra high
performance concrete members subjected to bending and shear, 15th
Concrete Congress
4. cubus Hellas Ltd (1998) : FAGUS-3

.
cubus Hellas Ltd (1998) : FAGUS-3 Verification and design of
reinforced and prestressed concrete sections software
5. cubus Hellas Ltd (2005) : FAGUS-5

.
cubus Hellas Ltd (2005) : FAGUS-5 Verification and design of
reinforced and prestressed concrete sections software
6. 2000 : .
7. Ritter W. (1899) : Die Bauweise Hennebique , Schweiz. Bauzeitg.17,
41-43, 49-52 und 59-61.
8. Mrsch E. : Der Eisenbetonbau - Seine Theorie und Anwendung ,
Verlag von Konrad Wittwer, Stuttgart, 3. Auflage (1908), 4. Auflage
(1912), 5. Aufl. 1. Bd. 1. Hlfte (1920), 2. Hlfte (1922).
9. Thrlimann B. , Ziegler H. (1963) : Plastische Berechnungsmethoden,
Vorlesungsautographie ETHZ.
10. Thrlimann B. , Grob J. und Lchinger P. (1975) : Torsion, Biegung
und Schub in Stahlbetontrgern , Vorlesungsautographie ETHZ.
11. Mller P. (1978) : Plastische Berechnung von Stahlbetonscheiben und
- balken , IBK - ETHZ, Bericht Nr.83, Birkhuser Verlag Basel und
Stuttgart.
12. Marti P. (1980) : Zur plastischen Berechnung von Stahlbeton , IBK
ETHZ, Bericht Nr.104, Birkhuser Verlag Basel - Boston - Stuttgart.
13. Roy H.E.H. and Sozen M.A. (1964) : Ductility of Concrete, Flexural
Mechanics of Reinforced Concrete , Proc. of the Int. Symp. , Miami,
ASCE - ACI.
276
14. Rsch H. und Stckl S. (1979) : Versuche an wendelbewehrten

Stahlbetonsulen unter kurz- und langzeitig wirkenden zentrischen
Lasten , D.A.f.St.B. , Heft 205, W. Ernst Berlin.
15. Menne B. (1977) : Zur Traglast der ausmittig gedrckten
Stahlbetonsttze mit Umschnrungsbewehrung , D.A.f.St.B. , Heft
285, W. Ernst Berlin.
16. DIN 1045 1 : (2001-07) : Tragwerke aus Beton, Stahlbeton und
Spannbeton. Teil 1 : Bemessung und Konstruktion. DIN Deutsches
Institut fr Normung e. V. , Berlin.
17. Kupfer H. , Hilsdorf K.A. and Rsch H. (1969) : Behaviour of Concrete
under Biaxial Stresses, Journal of ACI, 66, 656-66.
18. Vecchio F. and Collins M.P. (1982) : The Response of Reinforced
Concrete to in - Plane Shear and Normal Stresses , Univ. Of Toronto.
19. Rsch H. (1955) : Versuche zur Festigkeit der Biegedruckzone Festigkeit
und
Verformung
des
exzentrish
gedrckten
Rechteckquerschnittes aus unbewehrtem Beton bei kurzzeitiger
Lasteinwirkung , D.A. f. St. B. , Heft 120, W. Ernst Berlin.
20. Mattock A. , Kriz L. and Hognestad E. (1960-61) : Rectangular
Concrete Stress Distribution in Ultimate Strength Design , Proc. of the
ACI, 57, P. 875.
21. Cox K.C. (Sept. 1941) : Test of Reinforced Concrete Beams with
Recommendations for Attaining Balanced Design , ACI Journal, V. 13,
No. 1, (Proc. V. 38).
22. Lash S. D. and Brison J.W. (Feb. 1950) : The Ultimate Strength of
Reinforced Concrete Beams , ACI Journal V. 21, No 7, (Proc. V. 46).
23. Slater W. A. And Lyse I. (June 1930) : Compressive Strength of
Concrete in Flexure as Determined from Tests of Reinforced Beams ,
ACI J Journal, V. 1, No. 8, (Proc. V. 26).
24. Columbia University (1941) : Comparative Tests of Concrete Beams
Reinforced with Isteg and Hot Rolled Deformed Bars , Report Nr.
2507, Columbia Univ.
25. Wischers G. (1978) : Aufnahme und Auswirkungen von
Druckbeanspruchungen auf Beton , beton 28, H. 2.
26. Kani M. , Huggins M. and Wittkopp R. (1979) : Kani on Shear in
Reinforced Concrete , Dept. Of Civil Eng. , Univ. Of Toronto.
27. SIA 162, Richtlinie 34 (1968) : Bruchwiderstand und Bemessung von
Stahlbeton - und Spannbetontragwerken , Schweizer Ingenieur und
Architekten - Verein, Zrich.
28. Leonhardt F. und Walther R. (1962) : Schubversuche an einfeldrigen
Stahlbetonbalken mit und ohne Schubbewehrung , D. A. f. St. B. , Heft
151.
277
29. Bachmann H. und Thrlimann B. (1965) : Versuche ber das

plastische Verhalten von zweifeldrigen Stahlbetonbalken, IBK - ETHZ,
Berichte Nr. 6203-1 und -2.
30. Nawy E. , Danesi R. and Grosko J. (Dec. 1968) : Rectangular Spiral
Binders Effect on Plastic Hinge Rotation Capacity in Reinforced
Concrete Beams , ACI Journal.
31. Marti P. , Pralong J. , Thrlimann B. (1977) : Schubversuche an
Stahlbetonplatten , IBK - ETHZ, Versuchsbericht Nr. 7305 - 2,
Birkhuser Verlag Basel und Stuttgart.
32. Pralong J. , Brndli W. , Thrlimann B. (1979) : Durchstanzversuche
an Stahlbeton und Spannbetonplatten , IBK - ETHZ Versuchsbericht
Nr. 7305 - 3, Birkhuser Verlag Basel und Stuttgart.
33. Kinnunen S. , Nylander H. (1960) : Punching of Concrete Slabs
without Shear Reinforcement , Royal Inst. of Technology Transactions
No. 158, Stockholm.
34. Richart F. E. (Oct. and Nov. 1948) : Reinforced Concrete Wall and
Column Footings , Parts 1 and 2, Journal of the ACI, Proc. V. 45.
35. Elstner R. C. , Hognestad E. (July 1956) : Shearing Strength of
Reinforced Concrete Slabs , Journal of the ACI, Proc. V. 53, No. 1.
36. Moe J. (April 1961) : Shearing Strength of Reinforced Concrete Slabs
and Footings under Concentrated Loads , Development Department,
Bulletin D. 47, Portland Cement Association.
37. Brameshuber W. (2004) : Selbstverdichtender Beton , Schriftenreihe
Spezialbetone Band 5, Verlag Bau + Technik.
38. Knig G. , Holschemacher K. und Dehn F. (2002) : Faserbeton Innovationen im Bauwesen - Beitrge aus Praxis und Wissenschaft ,
Bauwerk , Berlin.
39. Knig G. , Holschemacher K. und Dehn F. (2003) : Ultrahochfester
Beton - Innovationen im Bauwesen - Beitrge aus Praxis und
Wissenschaft , Bauwerk , Berlin.
40. Wai - Fah Chen (1975) : Limit analysis and soil plasticity , Elsevier
Scientific Publishing Company.
41. Knig G , Viet Tue N. , Zink M. (2001) : Hochleistungsbeton , Ernst &
Sohn
42. Englekirk R.E. (2003) : Seismic design of reinforced and precast
concrete buildings , Wiley.
43. Leonhardt Fritz (1978) : Vorlesungen ber Massivbau Teil 1-6,
Springer - Verlag.
44. .. :
, -.
278
45. ., ., . . (2006) :

, 15 .
46. J.P. Moehle, K. J. Elwood, H. Sezen : Gravity load collapse of building
frames during earthquakes , Pacific Erthquake Engineering Research
Center, UC Berkeley.
47. H. Sezen and J.P. Moehle : Shear strength model for lightly reinforced
concrete columns.
279
Symbols
Latin upper case letters:
cross sectional area
Ac
cross sectional area of concrete
As
cross sectional area of steel reinforcement
cross sectional area of compressive reinforcement
AsB
cross sectional area of shear reinforcement
AsD
cross sectional area of inclined struts reinforcement
Asl
cross sectional area of longitudinal reinforcement
Asp
area of prestressing tendons
Asq
cross sectional area of transverse reinforcement (stirrups) in one direction
viscous damping coefficient
C1
elastoplastic to elastic oscillators displacements ratio
C2
hysteretic behaviour factor
C3
P- effects factor
Cm
effective mass factor
Co
roof displacement factor
axial force in inclined strut
modulus in elasticity
ED
energy dissipated due to hysteretic behaviour
elastic energy stored
Ee
modulus of elasticity (unloading, effective)
Es
modulus of elasticity of steel
Et
tangent modulus of elasticity
F, P
force
Fs
reinforcement steel force
Fs
compressive reinforcements steel force
Fsp
prestressing steel force
279
Fsy
yield force of steel
Ft
yield force of steel with strain hardening
F y , Py
yield force
Ge
effective weight
Gk
self weight of a building (characteristic value)
total height
second moment of a section
stiffness
Ke
effective stiffness
Ki
initial (elastic) stiffness
Ks
tangent stiffness (negative)
length
Lpl
plastic hinge length
mass, bending moment
bending moment
reinforcement
Me
effective mass
ML
earthquake magnitude in Richter scale
Mpl
plastic moment
My
yield moment
axial force
axial force without the contribution of compressive reinforcement
NR
concrete strength under uniaxial compression
Pr
return period
load
Qk
live load (characteristic value)
Qpl
plastic strength load
QR
failure load
ratio of the elastic spectral demand to the yield strength of the

structure
soil factor
without
280
the
contribution
of
compressive
Sa
spectral acceleration
Sd
spectral displacement
Si
spectral value
Sv
spectral velocity
SPid
performance level due to angular deformation (drift)
SPii
performance level due to ductility
eigenperiod
, C, TD spectral characteristic periods

Te
effective eigenperiod
initial (elastic) eigenperiod
horizontal force, shear force, volume
Vcd
shear force due to concretes strength
Vel
horizontal force of the elastic oscillator
Vpl
plastic strength shear force
VRd1
design concrete shear resistance in elements without shear reinforcement
VRd2
design shear force resisted by the strength of the compressive struts of

concrete
VRd2,red
reduced value of VRd2 due to an axial compression force
VRd3
design shear resistance force in elements with shear reinforcement
Vwd
design shear force resisted by the shear reinforcement (stirrups)
Vu
ultimate lateral force
Vy
lateral yield force (strength)
(seismic) weight of the oscillator
281
Latin lower case letters:
negative stiffness coefficient
as
shear ratio
width of a cross-section
bw
width of the web of a cross-section (shear)
effective depth of a cross-section, distance between two consecutive

vertices of confinement ties
fc
compressive strength of concrete
fc*
residual compressive strength of concrete
fcd
design value of fc (compressive strength of concrete)
fct
tensile strength of concrete
fck
characteristic compressive strength of concrete
fs , f y
yield stress of reinforcement steel
fsB
yield stress of stirrups steel
fsD
yield stress of the compressive struts steel
fsl
yield stress of longitudinal reinforcement
fsq
yield stress of the transverse reinforcement (stirrups)
fsp
yield stress of prestressing steel
fsy
yield stress of steel
ft
yield stress of steel with strain hardening
fyk
characteristic yield stress of steel
fywd
design yield stress of shear reinforcement
acceleration of gravity
height, depth
size effect factor (shear)
ks
slope of displacement spectrum T=TD up to the point
length
282
bending moment ratio
bending moment
reinforcement
mpl
plastic bending moment ratio
mR
failure bending moment ratio
axial force ratio
axial force ratio without the contribution of compressive reinforcement
nR
compressive strength ratio of concrete
behaviour factor, distributed variable load
curvature radius
rp
radius of a circular slab
rQ
radius of a circular column
ru
minimum radius of concretes shear resistance
spacing of stirrups
thickness
displacement
velocity
acceleration
ground acceleration (excitation)
shear force ratio
vB
shear force ratio resisted by stirrups
vpl
plastic strength shear force ratio
vR
failure shear force ratio
vRd1
design shear resistance ratio of concrete without shear reinforcement
we
(effective) weight per unit (floor plan) area
neutral axis depth
lever arm of internal forces
zpl
lever arm of internal forces when plastic strength is reached
zR
lever arm of internal forces at failure
ratio
without
283
the
contribution
of
compressive
Greek upper case letters:
A,,,
soil classes
Hellenic Military Geographical Service
inelastic displacement capacity
yield displacement (bilinear approximation)
rotation angle when concrete strength loss occurs
Greek earthquake-resistant design Code
Greek reinforced concrete design Code
Reinforced concrete buildings interventions Code
Public Works Central Laboratory
Mystakides-Kanellopoulos method
Earthquake Planning and Protection Organization
Greek lower case letters:
maximum ground acceleration ratio
acceleration, drift, shear deformation
safety factor for concrete
safety factor for steel
displacement
el
elastic displacement
ground displacement
pl
plastic displacement
roof displacement of a building
target displacement
yield displacement
lateral earthquake load coefficient, strain
ce
elastic axial deformation of concrete
284
cel
limit of elastic deformation of concrete under uniaxial compression
cR
compressive strain at concrete fracture
longitudinal strain
transverse strain
qc
transverse strain of concrete
qR
transverse strain where concrete strength loss occurs
qs
transverse strain of concrete at the position of stirrup
qo
maximum transverse deformation of concrete with residual strength fc* =

fc/2
steel strain
su
elongation of steel at fracture
sy
yield strain of steel
failure strain
yield strain of steel
critical damping ratio
equivalent viscous damping ratio due to hysteretic processes
critical effective damping ratio
damping correction factor, building torsion correction factor
concrete struts inclination
Rc
plastic rotation at concrete failure
pl
maximum plastic rotation
cpl
maximum plastic rotation limited by concrete
spl
maximum plastic rotation limited by steel
curvature, longitudinal reinforcement exploitation factor
maximum failure curvature limited by concrete
maximum failure curvature limited by steel
lateral to vertical (weight) load ratio, prestress level
el
ratio at elastic performance limit
ratio at yield
ductility
285
rotational ductility of a section for the decrease of shear strength of

concrete
frequency
strain hardening factor
reinforcement area ratio
compressive reinforcement area ratio
longitudinal reinforcement area ratio
reinforcement area ratio
stress
concrete stress
cp
average stress in the concrete due to axial force and prestressing
cp,eff
effective average stress in the concrete due to axial force and

compressive reinforcement
cR
compressive strength of concrete struts
transversal stress
sp
prestressing steel stress
tensile stress, tangential stress
shear stress
Rd
design shear strength of concrete
pl
plastic strength shear stress
shear strength of concrete
rotation angle (rad)
reduction coefficient for earthquake live load
circular frequency, mechanical reinforcement ratio
mechanical shear reinforcement ratio
mechanical reinforcement ratio for the compressive strut
mechanical longitudinal reinforcement ratio
mechanical transverse reinforcement ratio for a specific direction
sw
design mechanical shear reinforcement ratio
286
It is already generally acceptable that a reinforced concrete building may securely resist the
design earthquake if it may locally perform plastic deformations and avoid at the same time
brittle failures. Main concern of the modern designer is metelastic behaviour, ductility, criteria of
brittle fracture and design or redesign (strengthening) strategy. The above considerations are
also valid for a new building that is designed in accordance with the current regulations for a
reduced seismic action. This assumes elastoplastic response of the structure that remains
unknown for the designer performing the a priori capacity design.
The first part covers the elastoplastic response of the single degree of freedom oscillator. The
calculation of the maximum probable displacement of the oscillator is based either on the
empirical method of the displacement coefficient or on the capacity spectrum method derived
from the hysteretic damping of the system. The results are compared with those of the timehistory analysis of earthquake recordings of the last twenty years in Greece. For stiff, low
strength structures, unfavorable soil conditions the results seem to be much higher than the
theoretical values therefore improved solutions for practice are proposed. Application of
pushover method in multi degree of freedom systems is analyzed followed by a presentation of
evaluation strategies, design or redesign of the structure through the increase of stiffness,
strength and ductility. Simple relations for the design of earthquake resistant walls are also
proposed, suitable for preliminary studies.
The second part covers inelastic deformation and fracture mechanisms of concrete and the
effect of confinement in the increase of ductility. The effect of brittle failure under compression
and shear is examined as an result of concentration of inelastic deformations. Simple models for
confinement, bending and shear are presented where various shear transfer mechanisms are
analyzed. Examples for brittle failure of short columns are solved, plastic rotation is calculated
and as a final point brittle failure of slabs under punching shear is modeled.
The third part covers examples of redesign and strengthening of buildings, designed using the
pushover method and already constructed. Application of the new Greek regulations for
interventions establishes the use of inelastic static analysis for such purposes.
Kanellopoulos, A., Dr. sc. techn. ETH Zuerich, Civil Engineer NTUA, worked on bridges design
in Leonhardt + Andrae office, research teaching in IBK of ETH Zuerich under Prof. B.
Thuerlimann, PHD thesis on Metelastic behaviour and fracture of reinforced concrete. Founder
of cubus Hellas, engineering and software house for static and earthquake resistant design of
buildings, bridges, steel structures and geotechnical works. Introduced the inelastic analysis
based on displacements since 98 in Statik, planned during the last two decades numerous
earthquake-resistant redesign projects through the addition of walls, cores or even use of ultra
high performance concrete. Developer of software, writer of publications, and consultant of
many engineering and construction firms on earthquake-resistant design subjects (Athens
International Airport, Olympic games projects, Heracles General Cement Company etc.).

Part-3-Enn Redesign and Stregthening Applications

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Part-3-Enn Redesign and Stregthening Applications

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Part 3

Redesign and strengthening applications

3.1 School building Strengthening of shear walls foundation

SCHOOL BUILDING STRENGTHENING OF SHEAR WALLS

Figure 3.1 Damage, as indicated by the method of Push Over analysis

The proposed solution required strengthening of the foundation (increase of

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

Vertical reinforcement 16/15

Vertical reinforcement 16/15

Figure 3.2 Ground floor wall strengthening

The strengthening of the foundations was realized through firstly excavating

3.1 School building Strengthening of shear walls foundation

Figure 3.4 Push Over curve of the existing building

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

Figure 3.6 Push Over curve of the strengthened building

3.1 School building Strengthening of shear walls foundation

Figure 3.7 One-sided wall strengthening reinforcements

Higher education buildings Adding of shear walls

This is a complex of 5 buildings separated with expansion joints. The buildings

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

indispensable, even at the early stages of the preliminary study. Otherwise, it

d=11 K12 (40/35)

Figure 3.8 Integration of cores in the existing grid

3.2 HIGHER EDUCATION BUILDINGS ADDING OF SHEAR WALLS

Figure 3.9 Foundation of new walls

Figure 3.10 Reconstruction of the slab on soil

Figure 3.11 Push Over curve of an existing building

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

LOCATING SEISMIC FAILURES WITH PUSH OVER METHOD

EDUCATIONAL BUILDINGS STRENGTHENING WITH NEW SHEAR WALLS

Figure 3.12 Before strengthening

3.2 HIGHER EDUCATION BUILDINGS ADDING OF SHEAR WALLS

Figure 3.14 Push Over curve of the strengthened building

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

Figure 3.15 Beam integrated in the wall

Figure 3.16 Composite steel and concrete

Figure 3.17 New wall

Figure 3.18 New elevator shaft core

This example is a typical case of lack of strength and stiffness. Members

3.3 Office building addition of cores

Office building addition of cores

Figure 3.19 Push Over analysis damage indications

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

Vertical reinforcement 214/15

Figure 3.20 Conventional concrete strengthening cores

Figure 3.21 C180 strengthening core (alternative)

Figure 3.22 Core foundation

Figure 3.23 Connection of cores with the

3.3 Office building addition of cores

Figure 3.24 Strengthening with cores

Figure 3.25 Concreting of cores

For comparative reasons, an alternative strengthening solution with similarly

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

3.3 Office building addition of cores

8-storey residential buildings addition

Furthermore, increased differential displacements from storey to storey

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

Figure 3.29 Magnetoscopic image of transverse reinforcement

The investigation detected that distances between stirrups ranged from 40 to

Brittle shear failure of a pilotis column

Figure 3.31 Push Over analysis damage indications

3. Redesign and strengthening applications

Figure 3.32 Strengthening cores in plan and section

Figure 3.33 Open ground storey floor slab