1Group 3
Evaluation of seismic resistanceof buildings in Peru
Group Leaders
Dr. Carlos Zavala

PI - SATREPS Peruvian side

Dr. Taiki Saito

Professor, Toyohashi University of Technology

G3 Research Subjects

2Category

Achievement

Seismic Design ofbuildings in Peru
(for new buildings)

Seismic test database of masonry elements
Æ design formula
Material testing
Design method of non‐ductile wall
Proposing evaluation method (based on JP)

Seismic Evaluation ofbuildings in Peru
Computer Simulation software of masonry(for existing buildings) using DEM
Remote monitoring with IT sensors
Propose CF sheets retrofitting for non‐Seismic Retrofitting(for existing buildings) ductile wall3

Collection of Data of Masonry Structure(as of March 13, 2012)

ReferenceTotal
Numberof Papers

EmpiricalStudy

OthersRemarks

Architectural Institute ofJapan (AIJ)

367

241

57:material
69: others

1979 - 2010

Japan Concrete Institute(JCI)20

12

8: material,
analysis,others

2003 - 2008

World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering(WCEE)

243

89

154: design, 1980(7WCEE) analysis,
2008(14WCEE)
othersEarthquake Spectra(Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute: EERI)

158

12

146: design, 1984 - 2011
analysis,othersMasonry : Unreinforced Masonry, Reinforced Masonry and Confined Masonry
3Elwood 2009

In‐plane shear response
CrackingMaximum“Ultimate”

44

0.20

5P ⋅σhσ= 0.018 + 0.054 + 0.43 we wy + 0.24 0FmlFmFm

τu

Proposed formula

R = 0.86

Experimental values

0.15

RM Walls(Fully GroutedConcrete Blocks)
BRI○ Shear Failure

0.10

KIKUCHI◇ Shear Failure

0.05

Number of specimen 25
Mean Value
1.00
Standard deviation
0.15
Coefficient of variation 0.15

0.00
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

Maximum
Shear Stressτu/Fm

0.20

Calculated valuesEvaluation of Shear Strength
Using Obtained Regression Equation
Strength and Deformation of MasonryWalls Subjected to Lateral Forces

0.20

5Pte ⋅ σ yσh= 0.079 − 0.083 + 0.62+ 0.67 0FmlFmFmτu

R = 0.83

RM Walls(Fully Grouted
Concrete Blocks)

Proposed formula

Experimental values

0.15

BRI
● Flexural Failure

KIKUCHI◆ Flexural Failure

0.10

0.05

Number of specimen 37
Mean Value
1.01
Standard deviation
0.20
Coefficient of variation 0.20

0.00
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

MaximumShear Stressτu/Fm

Calculated valuesEvaluation of Flexural Strength
Using Obtained Regression Equation
Strength and Deformation of MasonryWalls Subjected to Lateral Forces

6

Seismic Capacity Evaluation of Masonry Buildings

7Seismic Structural Index Is

I S = φ × E0 × S D × T
n +1
φ=n+i

n: number of stories of the building
i: number of the story for evaluation
E0: basic seismic index of structure=C (strength index) x F (ductility index)
SD: irregularity index
T: time index
Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association: Standardfor Seismic Evaluation of Existing Reinforced Concrete
Seismic Performance of Masonry Buildings
Buildings, 2001.10
and Evaluation Methods

78Analysis of out‐of‐plane failure

9Wall A

Wall B

Wall C

10Wall A

Wall B

Wall C11

Wall A

Wall B

Wall C

12Wall A

Wall B

Wall C

13
Decrease of frequency

Wall B

Wall A

Wall C

Simulation of out‐of‐plane failure

STERA_Briq

Discrete element model for brick14

2010 Chile earthquakeX2010 Chile Earthquake
Japan-Peru-Chile joint
investigation teamX’

17-story building

Wall structure suffered flexuralfailure.
Shear failure of wall … studied well
Flexural failure of wall … need more study

Seismic retrofitting using CF sheets 16Lower story wall in 12-story building assumed, about 2/3 scale
Three specimens were prepared
Non retrofitting wall is designed to be flexural failure- Existing RC wall (SpecimenWF)80- Retrofitted RC wall
(Specimen RWF1)

1600- Retrofitted RC wall
(Specimen RWF2)

端部縦筋3-D13

1600

1600

1600

80

80

Carbon fibersheet

壁縦筋D6@150シングル
壁横筋D6@150シングル

定着板PL-9length of wall : 1600mm
height of wall : 1600mm
thickness of wall : 80mm
longitudinal bar at the end of wall : 3-D13
wall reinforcing bar : D6@150single

Wrapping CF sheetover Full-length of wall

Wrapping CF sheet atthe end of wall withsteel plate and bolt
1617Specimens
Process of retrofitting

17

Wrap sheet

Loading procedure

18

Reversed lateral force
Additional moment

Drift angle:
R=δ/h0.00125
0.00250.005
0.0075
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.03

Constant
axial force
343kN

Cycle
1222
2
2
2
2

shear-span ratio of 1.5

18

No retrofitting (flexural failure)
R=1.5%rad19

Full retrofittingSpecimen RWF1

R=2.0%rad20

Partial retrofitting
R=2.0%radSpecimen RWF221

Shear force – drift angle relationship 22
Envelope curve
300

Shear force (kN)

250
200
150
100

WFRWF1RWF250
0
0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Drift angle (%)

It is confirmed that ductility improve due to wrapping carbon fiber sheet.
Effect of constraining concrete of specimen RWF2 is larger than specimen RW
RWF1

RWF222