Јаки земљотреси целу конструкцију стављају на тежак тест.

Као резултат,
све структурне слабости, грешке у анализи и дизајну, као и лоше
конструкције , веома су очигледне. Јаки земљотреси обично доводе
побољшања или чак драстичних промена дизајна и метода пројектовања.
Тешко је клсификовати штету насталу током земљотреса, а још теже
повезати је са узроком штете, јер динамички карактер сеизмичке
активности и нелинеаран одговор конструкције чине упитним сваки
покушај да се овај феномен објасни једноставним статичким моделом.
Упркос томе, према тренутом концепту понашања конструктивних
елемената при цикличном нелинеарном оптерећењу, може се довољно
тачно симулирати понашање конструкције током јаких земљореса и
направити одређена категоризација настале штете. Овом класификацијом
није обухваћена штета настала због грешака у анализи, лошег кваклитета
бетона, неправилно армирање итд. Недостаци овог типа су увек присутни у
конструкцијама и њихова учесталост и озбиљност зависе од технолошког
развоја земље. Наравно, ови недостаци доприносе степену штете при
земљотресу, а некад мог бити и фатални за стабилност зграде.
Учесталост неке врсте оштећења зависи од пуно фактора?

Оштећења стубова
Оштећења стубова приликом земљотреса могу се поделити у два типа:
-оштећења услед цикличног савијања и малог смицања при великом
аксијалном притиску
Манифестују се оштећењима на врху дну стуба. Јавља се у стубовима
средње и велике виткости код којих је:
 Велики моменти савијања у тим тачкама у комбинацији са аксијалном
силом доводе до дробљења притиснуте зоне бетона, сукцесивно на обе
стране стуба. Што је мањи број веза? у овим областима, већа је њихова
осетљивост на ову врсту оштећења. У притиснутој зони прво отпада
заштитни слој бетона, након тога бетонско језгро се шири и дроби, што је
обично праћено избочавањем шипки под притиском and by hoop
fracture. Лом? везе и распадање бетона доводе до скраћења стуба услед
аксијалне силе, при чему долази до прерасподеле напона у стубу. Зато је
ова врста оштећења веома озбиљна,зато што стуб не само са губи крутост,
већ и способност да преноси вертикално оптерћење. Ова вста оштећења је
врло честа. Као главне узроке треба узети у обзир низак квалитет бетона,
неадекватан број веза у критичним областима, присуство јаке греде, што
доводи до тога да се прво оштећује стуб, и наравно, снажна сеизмичка
побуда која индукује многе циклусе оптерећења у нееластичном домену.
Слика: оштећење стуба услед великог аксијалног притиска и цикличног
момента савијања
а) дијаграм момената б) дијаграм трансверзалних сила ц) скица остећења
д) дијаграм нормалних сила

-оштећења услед цикличног смицања и малог савијања при великом

аксијалном притиску
Ова врста оштећења је последица смицања при којем настају
карактеристичне X пукотине у најслабијој зони стуба. Јавља се код стубова
средње и мале виткости код којих је:

**Captive column-одвојено?

The ultimate form of this type of damage is the explosive

cleavage failure of short columns
(Figures 11.5 and 11.6), which usually leads to a spectacular
collapse of the building. The
main reason for this type of damage is that the flexural capacity
of columns with moderate
to small slenderness ratio is higher than their shear capacity, and
as a result shear failure
prevails. The frequency of this type of damage is lower than the
failure at the top and
bottom of the column. It usually occurs in columns of the ground
floor, where, because of
the large dimensions of the cross-section of the columns, the
slenderness ratio is low. It also
occurs in short columns which have either been designed as
short, or have been reduced to
short because of adjacent masonry construction which was not
accounted for in the design
(Figures 4.8 and 4.9).
Finally, sometimes in the case of one-sided masonry-infilled
frames, masonry failure is
followed by shear failure of the adjacent columns (Figures 11.7
and 11.8) (Stylianidis and
Sariyiannis, 1992).
In conclusion, it has to be stressed that column damage is very
dangerous for the
structure, because it alters or even destroys the vertical elements
of the structural system.
Thus, when damage of this type is detected, means of temporary
support should be provided
immediately.
11.1.3 Damage to R/C walls

The damage which is caused by earthquake to R/C walls is of the

following types:
• X-shaped shear cracks;

Figure 11.3 Column damage due to strong axial compression and

shear: (a) bending
moment diagram; (b) shear force diagram; (c) axial force
diagram; (d) sketch of damage.

Seismic pathology 449

Figure 11.4 Column damage due to strong axial compression and

shear: (a) Kalamata,
Greece, 1986; (b) Mexico City, 1985.

450 Earthquake-resistant Concrete Structures

Figure 11.5 Explosive cleavage failure of a short column: (a)

bending moment diagram;
(b) shear force diagram; (c) axial force diagram; (d) sketch of
damage.
• sliding at the construction joint;
• damage of flexural character (horizontal cracks—crushing of the
compression zone).
During the Thessaloniki earthquake of 20 June 1978, 28.6% of the
buildings which suffered
damage in the structural system had damage in the R/C walls
(Penelis et al., 1987).
The most frequent type of damage is the appearance of cracks at
the construction joint
(Figures 11.9 and 11.10). Damage of this type occurred in 88% of
the buildings with wall
damage caused by the Thessaloniki earthquake of 20 June 1978
(Penelis et al., 1987,1988).
This damage is mainly due to the fact that old concrete is not
properly bonded with
fresh concrete. All seismic codes in effect today require that extra
care should be taken
when construction work is discontinued in order to ensure proper
bonding of concrete
(rough surface, cleaning, soaking, pouring of strong cement first
and then concrete). In
addition, placement of connecting reinforcement is also required
in the form of dowels.
The introduction of these requirements is the result of the high
frequency of this type of
damage. However, it has to be mentioned that this type of
damage does not pose a threat
to the stability of the building, because, with the horizontal
arrangement of the cracks, the
wall can still carry vertical loads. Also, from the stiffness point of
view, this type of damage
has only a slight effect on the entire structural system.
The appearance of X-shaped cracks in R/C walls is the next most
frequent damage
(Figures 11.11 and 11.12). During the above-mentioned
Thessaloniki earthquake the
frequency of this damage reached 30% of the buildings with wall
damage. This is a shear
type of brittle failure. Because of the arrangement of the cracks,
under the action of vertical
loads, the isosceles triangles which are formed on the two sides
tend to separate from the
structure and therefore cause its collapse (Figure 11.11). In order
to protect the structure
from this type of failure, all the current codes require the
formation of a column at each
side of the wall, which will carry the vertical loads after the shear
failure of the web. These
columns can either be thicker than the wall and visible, or they
can be incorporated in the
wall (Chapter 9).
Damage of flexural type occurs very rarely (Figure 11.13). It is the
authors’ belief that
this is due to the fact that the bending moments developing at
the base of the wall are much

Seismic pathology 451

Figure 11.6 Explosive cleavage failure of a short column: (a)

general view of a collapsed
building, Kalamata, Greece, 1986; (b) detail of a short column of
the building in (a).
smaller than those calculated for the design, because the footing
rotates as the soil deforms
during the earthquake (Figure 5.10). On the other hand, this soil
deformation does not much
alter the shear force which is carried by the wall, and as a result,
shear failure prevails.

452 Earthquake-resistant Concrete Structures

Figure 11.7 Damage in columns in contact with masonry on one

side only.

Figure 11.8 Damage in column in contact with masonry on one

side only, Loutraki,
Greece, 1981.

11.1.4 Damage to beams

The damage which occurs in R/C beams due to an earthquake is

as follows:
• cracks orthogonal to the beam axis along the tension zone of
the span;
• shear failure near the supports;
• flexural cracks on the upper or lower face of the beam at the
supports;
• shear or flexural failure at the points where secondary beams or
cut-off columns are
supported by the beam under consideration;
• X-shaped shear cracks in short beams which connect shear
walls.

Seismic pathology 453

Figure 11.9 Shear wall damage at a construction joint.

Figure 11.10 Shear wall damage at a construction joint, Kalamata,

Greece, 1986.

454 Earthquake-resistant Concrete Structures

Figure 11.11 Shear wall damage due to shear (X-shaped cracks).

Damage to beams, although, fortunately, it does not jeopardize
the safety of the structure, is
the most common type of damage in R/C buildings; 32.6% of the
buildings whose structural
system was damaged during the Thessaloniki earthquake of 20
June 1978, exhibited some
type of beam damage.
Cracks in the tension zone of the span constitute the most
common type of damage—
83% of the structures with beam damage in Thessaloniki due to
the June 1978 earthquake
had damage of this type. This type of damage (Figure 11.14)
cannot be explained using
analytical evidence, given the fact that the action of the seismic
forces does not increase
the bending moment in the span. However, the vertical
component of the seismic action,
due to its cyclic character, simply makes visible the microcracks
which are due to bending
of the tension zone, thus creating the impression of earthquake
damage. This is the reason
why the large majority of the cases of beams with this type of
damage do not jeopardize
the overall stability of the structure. It is also understood that the
high frequency of damage
of this type is rather misleading, since in most cases it is just a
manifestation of already
existing normal cracking rather than of earthquake damage.
The bending-shear failure near the supports (Figure 11.15) is the
second most frequent
type of damage (43%) in beams. Undoubtedly it constitutes a
more serious type of damage
than the previous one, given its brittle character. However, only in
very few cases does it
jeopardize the overall stability of the structure.
The flexural cracks on the upper and lower face of the beam at
the supports (Figure 11.16),
can be fully explained if the earthquake phenomenon is statically
approximated with horizontal
forces. From the frequency point of view, this type of damage is
rarer than the shear type (28%).
Most of the time cracking of the lower face is due to bad
anchorage of the bottom reinforcement
into the supports, in which case one or two wide cracks form close
to the support.

Seismic pathology 455

Figure 11.12 Shear wall damage due to shear (X-shaped cracks):

(a) Kalamata, Greece,
1986; (b) Bucharest, Romania, 1977.

456 Earthquake-resistant Concrete Structures

Figure 11.13 Shear wall damage due to flexure and compression.

Figure 11.14 Flexural cracks on a beam span.

Figure 11.15 Bending-shear cracks near the supports of a beam.

The shear or flexural failure at the points where secondary beams
or cut-off columns are
supported (Figure 11.17) appears quite frequently. It is due to the
vertical component of the
earthquake which amplifies the concentrated load.

Seismic pathology 457

Figure 11.16 Flexural cracks on the lower face of the beam at the
support.

Figure 11.17 Shear failure at the location of an indirect support.

X-shaped shear cracks in short beams coupling shear walls also
appear quite often. It is
a shear failure similar to that which occurs in short columns
(Figure 11.18) but not so
dangerous for the stability of the building (see also section 9.3.4).
11.1.5 Damage to beam-column joints

Damage in beam-column joints, even at the early stages of

cracking, must be considered
extremely dangerous for the structure and be treated accordingly.
Damage of this type reduces

Figure 11.18 Shear failure of a shear wall coupling beam.

the stiffness of the structural element and leads to uncontrollable
redistribution of load
effects. Common failures of beam-column joints (corner joint,
exterior joint of multi-storey
structure, and interior joint) are shown in Figures 11.19–11.22.

458 Earthquake-resistant Concrete Structures

The flow of internal forces in the reinforcement and the concrete
during the successive
phases of cyclic loading has already been explained in section 9.2
and will not be discussed here.