Dynamic punching shear of impacting RC flat slabs with drop panels
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Reinforced concrete flat slabs (FS) are sensitive to punching shear failure. Such failure may progress to the slab loss of supports and its downwards motion that is followed by its impact with the slab underneath. This slabs impact may initiate a progressive collapse of the entire building. The design guidelines provided by modern standards to avoid punching shear failure and to prevent post-punching loss of slab support in an attempt to prevent progressive collapse are based on static loads considerations and tests and do not include considerations and guidelines that are needed to guarantee resistance to impact loading. In our studies on the impact response of impacting slabs we learnt that increasing the slab thickness and the amount of reinforcement do not improve the slabs resistance to impact and cannot prevent the severe resulting damage. Drop panels are a common means to enhance the static resistance of slabs against punching shear as they increase the slab thickness around the column, where highest shear stresses are developed. The present paper aims at the investigation of the impact response of flat slabs with drop panels and examine their added contribution to reduce the post-impact damage and achieve a stable state of the impacted slab, thus preventing a following progressive collapse scenario. In addition to the local slab depth increase, the drop panel also limits the contact zone of the impacting slabs. Both aspects positively contribute to reducing the impact induced damage. The drop panel provides a means to locally increase the slab resistance without considerably increasing its mass, thus controlling the impact load intensity while increasing the slab’s resistance. The paper investigates the impacts of different possible combinations of two adjacent slabs with/without drop panels and finds that while flat slabs without drop panels fail upon impact, slabs with drop panels may survive the impact and avoid the following progressive collapse scenario. Opposed to static design where a drop panel contributes to the shear resistance, it was found that in the case of impact loading a large size drop panel increases the mass of the impacting slabs and may adversely affect the impact results, whereas a small size drop panel may not provide the required thickened zone. Examination of different drop panel geometries indicates that optimal drop panel dimensions exist which provide a stable final state which is associated with the minimum damage and a minimum permanent deflection. At larger or smaller drop panels the damage is larger and failure may occur. These are important findings that may help to improve the safe design of RC flat slabs.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Response to Dynamic Loads · High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (36)
Show source-provided references
1. Finite element analysis of punching shear of concrete slabs using damaged plasticity model in ABAQUS10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.04.016 ↗
2. Punching shear in concrete slabs10.1016/S0020-7403(97)00086-6 ↗
3. Aurelio Muttoni, “Punching Shear Strength of Reinforced Concrete Slabs without Transverse Reinforcement,” ACI Struct. J., vol. 105, no. 4, 2008.10.14359/19858 ↗
4. Background to fib Model Code 2010 shear provisions - part II: punching shear10.1002/suco.201200064 ↗
5. Nonlinear Punching Shear Failure Model for Interior Slab-Column Connections10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1999)125:9(997) ↗
6. Punching shear capacity of continuous slabs10.14359/51688758 ↗
7. Non-linear finite element analyses of punching shear failure of column footings10.1016/S0958-9465(01)00065-8 ↗
8. Punching shear resistance of flat slabs: Influence of reinforcement type and ratio
9. Ahmed, M., Sajib, E., & Barua, S. [2020a]. Seismic Performance Evaluation for Flat Slabs under Different Types of Soil Condition by Response Spectrum Method. Recent Trends in Civil Engineering & Technology, 10(2), 23–29. Seismic Performance Evaluation for Flat Slabs under Different Types of Soil Condition by Response Spectrum Method.pdf.
10. Progressive collapse behaviour of reinforced concrete flat slab buildings subject to column failures in different storeys
11. Impact of two columns missing on dynamic response of RC flat slab structures10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.10.011 ↗
12. Y.H. Weng, K. Qian, F. Fu, Q. Fang, Numerical investigation on load redistribution capacity of flat slab substructures to resist progressive collapse. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020c) 101109. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOBE.2019.101109.10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101109 ↗
13. EC2, “Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings,” 2004.
14. Model code 2010, Model code 2010: final draft. International Federation for Structural Concrete (fib), 2013.
15. ACI 318, “318-14: Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary,” 2014.
16. Collapse of 2000 Commonwealth Avenue: Punching Shear Case Study10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2004)18:1(54) ↗
17. H. Lew, N. Carino, S. F.-C. International, & 1982, U. Cause of the condominium collapse in Cocoa Beach, Florida. Concrete International, 4
18. (8) (1982) 64-73. https://www.concrete.org/publications/internationalconcreteabstractsportal/m/details/id/9056.
19. Mirzaei, Y. [2010]. Post-punching behavior of reinforced concrete slabs [EPFL]. https://doi.org/10.5075/EPFL-THESIS-4613.
20. Idea of a simplified model to determination of the load capacity of an inner slab-column connection after its punching10.1016/j.proeng.2013.09.022 ↗
21. Post-Punching Behavior of Flat Slabs
22. Department of Defence (DoD), “Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC): Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions (UFC 3–340–02),” 2008.
23. Simplified reliability analysis of punching in reinforced concrete flat slab buildings under accidental actions10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.09.061 ↗
24. Modeling the impact of failed members for progressive collapse analysis of frame structures10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2006)20:4(375) ↗
25. Progressive collapse mechanisms of brittle and ductile framed structures
26. A. G. Vlassis, B. A. Izzuddin, A. Y. Elghazouli, and D. A. Nethercot, “Progressive collapse of multi-storey buildings due to failed floor impact,” Eng. Struct., vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1522–1534, Jul. 2009.10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.02.009 ↗
27. Progressive collapse assessment of post-tensioned reinforced concrete flat slab structures using AEM10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.104278 ↗
28. Dynamic punching shear failure of a RC flat slab-column connection under a collapsing slab impact10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2019.103401 ↗
29. Evaluation of punching shear design criteria to prevent progressive collapse of RC flat slabs
30. Experimental study of drop-panel effects on response of reinforced concrete flat slabs after loss of corner column
31. A. Kai, “Title Experimental study of drop panel effects on response of reinforced concrete flat slabs after loss of corner column (Experimental and analytical analysis),” 2013.
32. “ISO - ISO 6935-2:2019 - Steel for the reinforcement of concrete — Part 2: Ribbed bars,” 2019.
33. ANSYS AUTODYN. Theory manual. revision 4.3. 2005.
34. RM. Brannon, S. Leelavanichkul “Survey of four damage models for concrete”, SANDIA Report, Sandia National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, 2009.10.2172/993922 ↗
35. W. Riedel “Beton unter dynamischen lasten meso-und makromechanische modelle und ihre parameter”. ErnstMach-Institute, PhD Thesis, Freiburg, Germany, 2000.
36. Yu-Qing Ding, Wen-Hui Tang, Ruo-Qi Zhang, Xian-Wen Ran. “Determination and validation of parameters for Riedel-Hiermaier-Thoma concrete model”, Defence Sci. J., Vol. 63, No. 5, pp. 524-530, 2013.10.14429/dsj.63.3866 ↗