Abstract

This paper presents the results from an experimental study on an innovative timber-based seismic retrofit solution for existing reinforced concrete (RC) buildings. The intervention aims at enhancing the overall seismic resistance of RC framed structures with a light, cost-effective, sustainable, and reversible approach, allowing possible integration with energy efficiency upgrades. The retrofit technique relies on cross-laminated timber (CLT) panels mechanically connected through steel fasteners to the RC frame. This strengthening technique is investigated experimentally for the first time in this paper. The study examines two intervention configurations with different degrees of invasiveness: the first (RC-TP) involves replacing the existing masonry infill wall with a CLT panel, whereas the latter (RC-TPext) consists in applying the panel to the outer face of the frame. Both retrofit configurations were assessed experimentally through cyclic quasi-static in-plane tests on full-scale single-storey, single-bay RC frames. The frames were identical in geometry and characterised by poor mechanical material properties and steel reinforcement details, promoting the development of a strong-beam-weak-column mechanism. The experiments comprised tests on four specimens: a non-retrofitted masonry-infilled frame employed as a reference specimen and three frames strengthened with CLT panels as infills or externally connected retrofitting elements. The paper presents construction details of the strengthening interventions, demonstrates a step-by-step application procedure, and summarises the main observations from the tests, illustrating the evolution of structural damage, the ultimate failure mode, and the cyclic hysteretic response of the specimens. The experiments showed promising results, proving that both retrofit configurations improved the seismic behaviour of the RC frames considerably. Specifically, the RC-TP and RC-TPext retrofit interventions increased the lateral strength of the reference frame by approximately 169% and 104%, respectively. At the same time, both configurations prevented the shear collapse of the columns.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call