Compression Behavior of Form Block Walls Corresponding to the Strength of Block and Grout Concrete
Source abstract
Abstract
This study aimed to present a reinforced concrete block system that reduces the flange thickness of the existing form block used in new buildings and optimizes the web form, and can thus capable of being used in the seismic retrofit of new and existing buildings. By conducting a compression test and finite element analysis based on the block and grouted concrete strength, it attempted to determine the compression capacity of the form block that can be used in new construction and seismic retrofit. As a result, the comparison of the strength equation from Architectural Institute of Japan to the prism compression test showed that the mortar coefficient of 0.55 was suitable instead of 0.75 recommended in the equation. The stress–strain relation of the block was proposed as a bi-linear model based on the compression test result of the single form block. Using the proposed model, finite element analysis was conducted on the prism specimens, and it was shown that the proposed model predicted the compression behavior of the form block appropriately.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Urban and spatial planning
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (9)
Show source-provided references
1. Architecture Institute of Japan (2006). Standards for structural design of masonry structures.
2. Jonaitis, B., & Zavalis, R. (2013). Experimental research of hollow concrete block masonry stress deformations. Procedia Engineering,57, 473–478.10.1016/j.proeng.2013.04.061 ↗
3. KS F 4002 (2011). Hollow concrete block.
4. Kim, K.-T., Seo, S.-Y., Yoon, S.-J., Yoshimura, K., & Sung, K.-T. (2004). Experimental study for higher seismic performance of confined masonry wall system, Korea Concrete Institute, (Vol.12(1), pp. 3–8) Proceeding of Fall Conference, November.
5. Ministry of Construction and Transportation. (2013). Korean architectural standard specification, pp. 7–53-7–55.
6. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (2009). KBC 2009, Production and Experiment of Prism, 2009-1245, 0603.4.6.
7. Shing, P. B., Noland, J. L., Klamerus, E., & Spaeh, H. (1989). Inelastic behavior of concrete masonry shear wall. Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE,115(9), 2204–2225.10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1989)115:9(2204) ↗
8. Yun, H.-D., Han, M.-K., Kim, S.-W., Lee, G.-W., Park, W.-S., & Choi, C.-S. (2005). Structural performance of lightly reinforced concrete frame strengthened with infilled walls by concrete blocks made in recycled sands. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea,21(4), 83–90.
9. Zhai, X., & Stewart, M. G. (2010). Structural reliability analysis of reinforced grouted concrete block masonry walls in compression. Engineering Structures,32(1), 106–114.10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.08.020 ↗