资源目录
压缩包内文档预览：
编号：32988206
类型：共享资源
大小：4.55MB
格式：ZIP
上传时间：2019-12-20
上传人：遗****
认证信息
个人认证
刘**（实名认证）
湖北
IP属地：湖北
25
积分
- 关 键 词：
-
派出所
办公楼
设计
全套
- 资源描述：
-
派出所办公楼设计（全套）,派出所,办公楼,设计,全套
- 内容简介：
-
82Vol.22 No.1 LIU Jifu et al: Experimental Investigation on Flexural Performance of .1 IntroductionUnreinforced masonry (URM) represents a large portion of the building materials around the world, especially in China. Most of the URM buildings were built with little or no considerations for anti-seismic design requirements, and the potential high risk of earthquake damage to these buildings has become one of the biggest problems that civil engineers must face up against. Recent earthquakes have shown that many such buildings are seismically vulnerable; therefore, the demand for upgrading strategies of these buildings has become increasingly stronger in recent years. Numerous techniques are available to increase the strength and ductility of URM walls, and many of them have proved to be effective, but not perfect. These techniques usually include the addition of framing elements such as steel columns, pilasters, beams, or surface treatments such as shotcrete or ferrocement to increase the strength and ductility of the walls. Such procedures are often time consuming, adding considerable mass to the structure, resulting in occupying available working space near the masonry wall to be reinforced, and adversely affect the aesthetics of the repaired area and in many cases the building as a whole. The extra mass added to the structure can also increase the earthquake-induced inertia forces.These problems may be overcome by using fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) sheets instead of the conventional techniques. FRP materials are made up of fibers (such as glass, carbon and aramid) bonded together with a resin matrix. The matrix materials are primarily thermoset resins such as polyesters, epoxies and vinylesters. Because of FRPs excellent strength-to-weight ratios, fairly small thickness, relatively unlimited material-length, comparably simpler installation, and immunity to corrosion, the use of FRP for reinforcing and retrofit is superior to the conventional reinforcing techniques. Many investigators have developed the usage of FRP on brick masonry1-7.This paper presents the results of an experimental program on the flexural behavior of URM beams reinforced with externally bonded GFRP laminates. The aims of this research were to validate the effectiveness of this reinforcing technique and to observe the mode of failure.2 Experimental2.1 MaterialsThe engineering properties of the materials used in this test are summarized as follows:The average compressive strength, which was obtained from the standard compressive test (GB/T2542) of the clay masonry was 12.2 MPa. The average compressive strength of mortar obtained from the standard compressive test (JGJ70-90) was 9.7 MPa. Standard tensile test (GB/T 3354) was performed on GFRP laminate, of which the nominal thickness was 0.169 mm, to determine their engineering properties. The test result showed that the tensile strength of GFRP was Experimental Investigation on Flexural Performance of Masonry Walls Reinforced with GFRPLIU Jifu1,LIU Ming1,2,SONG Yupu1(1.State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China; 2.School of Civil Engineering, Shenyang Jianzhu University, Shenyang 110168, China)Abstract: This paper presents the results of a test program for flexure reinforcing characteristics of gless fi ber-rein forced polymer(GFRP) sheets bonded to masonry beams. A total of eight specimens subjected to monotonic four-point bending were tested up to failure. These specimens were constructed with two different bond patterns. Six of these specimens were reinforced by using GFRP sheets prior to testing, and the remaining two were not reinforced. The test results indicate a signifi cant increase in both load-bearing capacity and ductile performance of the reinforced walls over the unreinforced ones.Key words: glass fi ber-reinforced polymer (GFRP); reinforce; masonry wall (Received: Nov.11,2005; Accepted: Jun.22,2006)LIU Jifu(刘骥夫): Ph D Candidate; E-mail: liu_ji_fuFunded by Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province (No. 20022005).DOI 10.1007/s11595-005-1082-6Journal of Wuhan University of Technology-Mater. Sci. Ed. Feb. 2007 83equal to 1 805.2 MPa, the modulus of elasticity was 82.3 GPa, and the ultimate strain was 2.51%.2.2 Details of the specimensEight masonry beams, which were constructed of clay bricks of 53 mm115 mm 240 mm sizes, were tested. All the specimens had the identical nominal dimensions of 240 mm240 mm 1 150 mm according to GBJ129 and were constructed with different bond pattern (Figs.1 and 2), namely stack bond and running bond. Two of them were unreinforced and the other six were reinforced with GFRP.2.3 Details of the reinforcing schemeEach of the specimens had a single GFRP strip, of which the nominal width was 95 mm, placed at the center of the bottom. The unidirectional GFRP sheet was oriented perpendicular to the bed joint, in other words, parallel to the brick beam longitudinal axis, to resist the flexural tensile stresses that develop under fl exural loads. The GFRP sheet was formed by manual lay-up onto the surface of the masonry beam to be reinforced. Prior to the GFRP installation, the surface was prepared by wire brushing in order to remove loose particles and provide a reliable substrate. The following step was the application of primer and puttying. The primary purpose of using putty fi llers was to level the uneven surfaces. After the putty fillers set, a layer of saturating resin was applied to the surface by a brush, and then, the GFRP sheet was adhered onto the surface. Once the sheet was placed, it was pressed down using a roller to eliminate entrapped air between the saturating resin and fibers. Finally, a second layer of saturating resin was applied on the surface of GFRP sheet. The reinforced specimens were cured under room condition before testing.2.4 Set-up and ProceduresThe beams were tested under simply supported conditions, namely four-point bending, with the bottom supports 1 050 mm apart and the top loads 350 mm apart (two of them with the bottom 200 mm apart). A steel shape beam was used to spread the load from the testing machine to the two loading points. Steel rollers and steel bearing pads bonded to the masonry to transfer the loads and reactions to the test beam. A 100 kN capacity hydraulic jack activated by a manual pump was used to load the specimen. The midspan defl ection was measured using a displacement transducer, and strain gauges were mounted directly onto the surface of the GFRP composite to measure the strain during application of load. The data acquired by the load cell, displacement transducer and strain gauges were collected by a data acquisition system UCAM70A.All the specimens were loaded monotonically up to failure in 3-5 minutes. Observe the failure mode while recording the data.3 Results and DiscussionThe results of the masonry beam tests are summarized in Table1. Where L means the masonry beam, T and C mean the pattern of stack bond and running bond, respectively, G means GFRP reinforced. The flexural capacity is presented in terms of the ultimate moment. Furthermore, the failure modes for each specimen are presented. Fig.3 illustrates the typical load-midspan deflection curves for the specimens.On one hand, it can be seen that both flexural capacity and mid-span deflection of the reinforced masonry beams increased considerably when comparing them to the unreinforced ones. The improvement of the fl exural capacity with stack bond and running bond was respectively about 4.5 times and 2.3 times the capacity of the unreinforced case. And the increase of the stable mid-span defl ection also achieved 9.3 times and 8 times the amount of the unreinforced case. On the other hand, there exists in the test results a clear and consistent pattern about the GFRP reinforced masonry beams mechanical behaviors.SpecimenUltimate moment/kNmUltimate defl ection/mmFailure modeLTLCLTG1LTG2LTG3LTG4LCG1LCG20.942.034.274.153.753.624.634.390.81.16.76.37.47.18.88.2FlexuralFlexuralFlexural-shearFlexural-shearFlexuralFlexuralGFRP ruptureand debondingGFRP debondingTable 1 Summary of Test Results84Vol.22 No.1 LIU Jifu et al: Experimental Investigation on Flexural Performance of .Up to cracking the masonry beams behaved almost in linear fashion. Initial cracking occurred in the mortar joint, and was delayed due to the presence of GFRP sheet. With load increasing, cracking at the adjacent joint occurred until almost every joint in the high moment bending area was cracked. In this phase of the test, the cracks widened until the ultimate failure occured.The specimens exhibited three basic types of failure modes, i e, debonding of the GFRP laminate from the masonry substrate, fl exural failure, and shear failure in the masonry near the support. The failure modes of the two unreinforced masonry beams LT and LC may be classified as flexural failure, because the failure occurred at the mortar joint in the flexural region between load points.Debonding was observed in beams LCG1 and LCG2 near the load points when the load was close to the ultimate load.The rapid spread of debonding from load point to support resulted in the ultimate failure. Flexural failure was observed in LTG3 and LTG4, of which the load points were 200 mm apart. When the ultimate load was achieved, the GFRP laminate near the mid-span ruptured and lost the resistant ability suddenly. Shear and fl exural failure was observed in LTG1 and LTG2. Different from LTG3 and LTG4, the load points of them were 350 mm apart. The masonry near support failed under shear stress before GFRP ruptured, and then, the GFRP laminate on the surface of cracked masonry became ruptured because of stress concentration. The difference between flexural and shear failure modes indicates that the length of shear span played an important role in determining the ultimate failure modes of the reinforced masonry walls.The maximum strain prior to ultimate failure of the flexural failure mode GFRP was 1.55%, which represented about 62% of the ultimate strain obtained from the tensile test, and the maximum strain of all the other specimens GFRP laminates were less than 50% of the tensile ultimate strain. Therefore, the effective maximum strain of GFRP laminate to be used in fl exural reinforcing design of masonry walls should be discounted to some degree. 4 ConclusionsReinforcing of URM walls with externally bonded FRP laminates appears to be an attractive alternative to traditional retrofit techniques. This paper investigated the contribution of GFRP laminates on the flexural capacity of unreinforced masonry walls. Firstly, both flexural and deformation capacities of the masonry beams are considerably increased after reinforced with GFRP laminate. The high tensile strength took an effect under out-of-plane flexural loads when externally bonded to the tensile face of the masonry beams. Therefore, the new type of materials GFRP is able to be combined to the masonry and to make up the tensile weakness of the old materials.Secondly, there existed three types of failure modes in the reinforced specimens. The kind of modes depends on the masonry bond pattern and the length of shear span. Only fail in fl exural modes can fully exert the high tensile strength of GFRP.Finally, even in the flexural modes, only about 60% of the tensile strength of GFRP laminate can be used. Therefore, the tensile strength should be discounted to some degree in design.To sum up, the GFRP reinforcing technique can be effectively used in masonry, and will become a promising alternative to the traditional reinforcing techniques.References1 M R Ehsani, H Saadatmanesh. Seismic Retrofit of URM Walls with Fiber CompositesJ. The Masonry Society Journal, 1996,14(2):63-72.2 J M Gilstrap, C W Dolan. Out-of-plane Bending of FRP- reinforced Masonry WallsJ. Composites Science and Technology, 1998, 58(8): 1 277-1 2843 R Luciano, E Sacco. Damage of Masonry Panels Reinforced by FRP SheetsJ. International J. of Solids and Structures, 1998, 35(15): 1 723-1 7414 T C Triantafillou. Strengthening of Masonry Structures Using Epoxy-bonded FRP LaminatesJ. J. of Composites for Construction, ASCE, 1998, 2(2): 96-1035 M R Ehsani, H Saadatmanesh, J I Velazquez-Dimas. Behavior of Retrofi tted URM Walls under Simulated Earthquake LoadingJ. J. of Composites for Construction, ASCE, 1999, 3(3):134-1426 T Zhao, C J Zhang, J Xie, H J Li. Experimental Study on Seismic Reinforcement of Brick Masonry Walls with Continuous Carbon Fiber SheetJ. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 2001, 21(2): 89-95 (in Chinese)7 X S Zhang, Q Gu, K J Guan, S M Peng. Experimental Study of Masonry Walls Strengthened by CFRPJ. J. of Wuhan University of Technology, 2002, 24(11): 29-32 (in Chinese) 淮 阴 工 学 院毕业设计外文资料翻译系 （院）：建筑工程学院专 业：土木工程房建方向姓 名：潘 安学 号：1081401421外文出处：武汉理工大学期刊(用外文写)Journal of Wuhan University of Technology附 件：1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文。指导教师评语： 年月日签名： 注：请将该封面与附件装订成册。附件1：外文资料翻译译文GFRP加固的砌体墙的抗弯性能实验研究摘要 ：本文提出了GFRP粘结砌体梁抗弯加强特征的测试结果。一共有8个标本受到单调四点弯曲测试是失败的。这些标本进行了两种不同的模式。其中6个标本在测试前通过GFRP进行加固，剩下的2个没有加固。实验结果表明加固过的比没有加固的标本在承载力和延性性能方面都有了很大的提升。关键词:玻璃纤维增强聚合物(GFRP)；加强；砌体墙1引言未加固砌体(URM)在世界上代表着一个庞大的建筑材料部分,尤其是在中国。大多数URM建筑在建造时很少或没有考虑抗震设计要求,而潜在的高风险地震损害成为这些建筑物最大的问题之一,土木工程师必须面对的困难。最近的地震表明,许多这样的建筑是易受地震冲击的;因此,升级这些建筑的需求在近些年变的越来越强烈。许多方法可以增强URM墙壁的强度和延性,其中许多已被证明是有效的,但并不完美。这些技术通常包括增加框架元素如钢柱、壁柱、梁或表面处理技术,如喷射混凝土或钢丝网水泥增加墙壁的强度和提高延性。这样的过程往往很耗费时间,将增加大量的大规模的结构,导致砌体墙附近的可用工作空间得到加强,造成美学的修理区不利影响,在许多情况下,建筑成为一个整体。额外的大规模添加树脂矩阵结构也会提高地震造成的惯性力量。基质材料主要是热固性树脂如聚酯、环氧树脂和乙烯基酯。因为FRP的优秀的力量与重量比率,相当小的厚度、相对无限的材料长度,相对简单的安装,和好的抗腐蚀性能,使用FRP加固较传统加固技术要好。许多研究人员已经开发出在砖砌体上FRP的使用。本文介绍了对使用GFRP层压板加固的URM梁的弯曲性能研究的一个实验性项目的结果。本研究的目的是验证这种有效的加固技术,观察出失败模式。2实验2.1材料本测试使用的材料的工程特性概括如下：平均抗压强度,标准的抗压测试(GB/T2542)的粘土的抗压强度是12.2 MPa。砂浆的平均抗压强度抗压测试得出的标准(JGJ70 - 90)是9.7帕。GFRP层压板进行拉伸标准试验(GB/T3354),标称厚度为0.169毫米,以便确定其工程特性。试验结果表明,GFRP的抗拉强度是1805.2Mpa,弹性模量为82.3Gpa,极限应变是2.51%。2.2标本的细节8根53115240mm的由粘土砖制成的砌体梁进行测试。所有的标本根据GBJ129有相同的名义尺寸240 2401150 mm，采用不同的结合模式(如图1和2),即堆叠模式和连续模式。他们两个都未加固而其他六个被GFRP强化。2.3详细的加固方案 每个标本只有单一GFRP地带,其中名义宽度95毫米,放置在底部的中心。单向GFRP板为垂直于床上联合,换句话说,平行于砖梁纵向轴线,抵制在弯曲荷载发展的弯拉应力。GFRP板形成的糊到表面的砖石结构梁将得到加强。GFRP安装前在表面制备钢丝刷以清除松散的粒子,并提供一个可靠的基质。下面的步骤是底漆和打腻子的应用。最主要的目的是使用腻子填充剂填平不平的表面。在腻子填料设备,一层饱和树脂被应用于地表,然后,GFRP板被粘到表面。一旦板被放置，辊轴承座之间消除在饱和树脂和纤维之间的空气，板被按下。最后,第二层的饱和树脂应用于表面新颖的GFRP板。钢筋标本在测试之前均被放置于房间环境下。2.4设置和过程 梁进行试验的简支条件,即四点弯曲,底部支持1050mm的分离，顶部装载350mm远(两者在底部距离200mm)。一个钢铁形状梁用于传播从测试机器到两种加载点的负载。钢辊和钢轴承垫粘结在砖石结构上去转移负载和反应测试光束。一个100 kN力被激活液压千斤顶手动泵用于加载标本。跨中挠度用位移传感器测定，在荷载增加时，应变仪是直接安装到GFRP表面复合测量应变。荷载传感器、位移传感器和应变仪的数据由UCAM70A数据采集系统采集。所有的标本被单调加载到失败在3 - 5分钟，在记录数据时观察失效模式。3 结果与讨论在表1中概述了砌体梁的测试结果。L意味着砌体梁，T、C分别意味着堆叠模式和连续模式,G意味着GF
- 温馨提示:
1: 本站所有资源如无特殊说明，都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。图纸软件为CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
2: 本站的文档不包含任何第三方提供的附件图纸等，如果需要附件，请联系上传者。文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
3.本站RAR压缩包中若带图纸，网页内容里面会有图纸预览，若没有图纸预览就没有图纸。
4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
5. 人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对用户上传分享的文档内容本身不做任何修改或编辑，并不能对任何下载内容负责。
6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容，请与我们联系，我们立即纠正。
7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。
人人文库网所有资源均是用户自行上传分享，仅供网友学习交流，未经上传用户书面授权，请勿作他用。
川公网安备: 51019002004831号