5/5/2014

Dr. Ghannoum is an assistant professor at the University

of Texas at Austin. He specializes in repair and retrofit of
reinforced concrete structures for life-span extension. Dr.
Ghannoum is the chair of ACI Committee 369, Seismic
Repair and Rehabilitation.

Seismic Assessment of Existing

Reinforced Concrete Buildings -
New Developments, Part 1 of 3
ACI Spring 2014 Convention
March 23 - 25, Reno, NV

WEB SESSIONS WEB SESSIONS

ACI Convention Spring 2014

Reno, NV
Background
1. ASCE/SEI 41-13 prescribes nonlinear Modeling Parameters (MP) and
Acceptance Criteria (AC) for various structural components
Nonlinear modeling parameters and acceptance 2. For columns MP and AC are given as limiting plastic rotations
criteria for concrete columns 3. MP are used to build analytical models of structures for seismic evaluation
4. AC provide deformation limits below which member performance is deemed
acceptable
Wassim M. Ghannoum
5. MP and AC are given in tables for various column conditions (depending on
Assistant Professor, University of Texas at Austin behavior) and key parameters

Adolfo B. Matamoros MP or AC

Professor, University of Kansas

Background MP or AC

Motivation
1. Current MP were selected conservatively
ASCE/SEI 41-13 Generic Backbone Curve
2. MP for different elements (beams, columns, joints, …) selected with
Q/Qy varying conservatism
b a, b & c: Modeling Parameters
a
IO, LS & CP: Acceptance Criteria Q/Qy
b
B IO C  IO: Immediate Occupancy aa
1.0
 LS: Life Safety
 CP: Collapse Prevention “Best” estimate MP
LS CP E 1.0  Structural behavior altered
D C
c (Peak deformation) B in analysis
A θy θ or D D
E
Conservative MP
A θy θ or D

1
 5/5/2014

Table 10-8. Modeling Parameters and Numerical Acceptance Criteria for Nonlinear Table 10-8. Modeling Parameters and Numerical Acceptance Criteria for Nonlinear
Procedures—Reinforced Concrete Columns Procedures—Reinforced Concrete Columns
Modeling Parametersa Acceptance Criteriaa Modeling Parametersa Acceptance Criteriaa

Motivation Motivation
Plastic Rotations Angle Plastic Rotations Angle
(radians) (radians)
Performance Level Performance Level
Residual Residual
Plastic Rotations Strength Plastic Rotations Strength
Angle (radians) Ratio Angle (radians) Ratio
Conditions a b c IO LS CP Conditions a b c IO LS CP

P---- c
A
Condition i.b  AC generate varying probabilities of exceeding a behavioral milestone P---- c
A
Condition i.b
-------  = -------v- -------  = -------v-

 AC were selected as fractions of MP

A g fc 

 0.1
bw s

 0.006 0.035 0.060 0.2 0.005 0.045 0.060 across structural members treated in ASCE/SEI 41-13 A g fc 

 0.1
bw s

 0.006 0.035 0.060 0.2 0.005 0.045 0.060

 0.6  0.006 0.010 0.010 0.0 0.003 0.009 0.010  0.6  0.006 0.010 0.010 0.0 0.003 0.009 0.010
 0.1  0.002 0.027 0.034 0.2 0.005 0.027 0.034  0.1  0.002 0.027 0.034 0.2 0.005 0.027 0.034
 0.6  0.002 0.005 0.005 0.0 0.002 0.004 0.005 AC defined as 75% of MP a  0.6  0.002 0.005 0.005 0.0 0.002 0.004 0.005

Member 1
Member 1
M/My • median MP a1
M/My • median MP a1
a1 0.75a1 • Large cov
• Large cov

Member 2
a2 Member 2 0.75a2
• conservative MP a2
• conservative MP a2
1.0 • Low cov
1.0 • Low cov

c
c
A θy Rotation (θ)
A θy Rotation (θ)

Objectives MP for RC columns - Dataset

1. Re-evaluate MP for concrete columns to achieve a median estimate  Extended database with close to 500 column tests

2. Use new extended database with close to 500 column tests

Ghannoum, W. M., and Sivaramakrishnan, B. (2012). "ACI 369 Rectangular Column Database.“ DOI: 10.4231/D36688J50
Ghannoum, W. M., and Sivaramakrishnan, B. (2012). "ACI 369 Circular Column Database.“ DOI:10.4231/D39Z90B9T
https://nees.org/resources/3658 ; https://nees.org/resources/3659
3. Treat circular columns
4. Explore cyclic damage effects
5. Adjust AC based on new MP
 Conservatism should be incorporated in AC not MP
 Select AC at percentiles of MP to achieve consistent probabilities of exceedance
across all members

Ghannoum, W. M., and Sivaramakrishnan, B. (2012). "ACI 369 Rectangular Column Database.“ DOI: 10.4231/D36688J50
Ghannoum, W. M., and Sivaramakrishnan, B. (2012). "ACI 369 Circular Column Database.“ DOI:10.4231/D39Z90B9T
https://nees.org/resources/3658 ; https://nees.org/resources/3659

MP for RC columns - Dataset MP for RC columns - Dataset

 Extended database with close to 500 column tests  Data in form of lateral force-deformation plots
90 140
Rectangular Rectangular
80 Circular 120 Circular

70
100
Number of Columns
Number of Columns

60
80
50

40 60

30
40
20
20
10

0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Axial Load Ratio s/d
90 90
Rectangular
Rectangular
Circular
80 Circular
V Vy<Vo
80

70 70
Number of Columns

60
60
Vy
Number of Columns

50
50

40
40 Vy>Vo
30
30

20
20
10 Drift
10
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
0 Vy/Vo Buenrostro, E. (2013). “Deformations in Non-Seismically Detailed
0 0.0025 0.005 0.0075 0.01 0.0125 0.015 0.0175 0.02 0.0225 0.025 0.0275 0.03 0.0325 0.035
Transverse Reinforcement Ratio Concrete Columns." MS Report, University of Texas at Austin

2
 5/5/2014

MP for RC columns – Data Extraction MP for RC columns – Data Extraction

 Target:
1. plastic rotations at initiations of loss of lateral strength (MP a)  plastic rotations at initiations of loss of lateral strength (MP a)
1. Selected when lateral load reaches 0.8Vmax on a degrading slope
2. plastic rotations at initiations of loss of axial strength (MP b)
2. a = (Δ0.8-Δy)/L
 Needed:
1. Drift at elastic limit
 plastic rotations at initiations of loss of axial strength (MP b)
Vmax
 b = (Δaxial-Δy)/L
0.7 Vmax
 Not all tests were conducted to axial collapse

∆y

MP for RC columns – Parameters MP for RC columns – Parameters

 Most influential parameters were found to be  Calculating Vy/Vo
 Axial load ratio
 Transverse reinforcement ratio Vy is the shear associated with the yield moment strength of a column
 Different from VP that utilizes 1.25fy for plastic moment strength
 Vy/Vo  Longitudinal bars will only reach 1.25fy in well confined columns

′
Φ 1 0.8
⁄ ′

α = 6 in psi units and 0.5 in MPa units

Φ is taken as 1.0 for s/d ≤ 0.75, zero for s/d ≥ 1.0, and linearly interpolated between the two
values of s/d

Table 10-8. Modeling Parameters and Numerical Acceptance Criteria for Nonlinear

Parameters MP for RC columns – a

Procedures—Reinforced Concrete Columns
Modeling Parametersa Acceptance Criteriaa
Plastic Rotations Angle
(radians)

 Regression analysis results

Performance Level
Residual
Plastic Rotations Strength
Angle (radians) Ratio
Table bounds need updating Conditions a b
Condition i.b
c IO LS CP
 Rectangular columns
c
P - A
----------  = -------v-
A g f c bw s
P Vy
 0.1  0.006 0.035 0.060 0.2 0.005 0.045 0.060
a R  0.042  0.043  0.63 t  0.023  0.0 (rad)
Circular columns
 0.6
 0.1
 0.006
 0.002
0.010
0.027
0.010
0.034
0.0
0.2
0.003
0.005
0.009
0.027
0.010
0.034
Ag f c' Vo
 0.6  0.002 0.005 0.005 0.0 0.002 0.004 0.005 0.0005 ≤ ρt ≤ 0.0175
 Circular columns (spirals or hoops) Vy/Vo ≥ 0.2
0.035

P Vy
0.03 aC  0.06  0.058  1.3 t  0.037  0.0 (rad)
transverse Reinforcement Ratio

Ag f c' Vo
0.025

Values of a at parameter boundaries

0.02
Rectangular columns P/(Agf ’c) ρt Vy/Vo aR (rad) aC (rad)
0.015 0 0.0005 0.2 0.038 0.058
0 0.0005 2.0 0.0 0.0
0.01 0 0.0175 0.2 0.048* 0.071*
0 0.0175 2.0 0.007 0.0
0.005
0.7 0.0005 0.2 0.008 0.016
0.7 0.0005 2.0 0.0 0.0
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.0175 0.2 0.018 0.029
Axial Load Ratio 0.7 0.0175 2.0 0.0 0.0

3
 5/5/2014

MP for RC columns – a MP for RC columns – a

 Analysis of fit  Analysis of fit
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, Vy/VO  0.6 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, Vy/VO  0.6
1 1

1 1 0.5 0.5
Number of Tests = 21 Number of Tests = 21
0 Standard Deviation = 0.015 0 Standard Deviation = 0.018
0.9 0.9 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06

Equation estimates Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, 0.6<Vy/VO  1.0 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, 0.6<Vy/VO  1.0
0.8 0.8 1 1
ASCE 41-06 estimates
Equation estimates
0.7 0.7
Cumulative Distribution

Cumulative Distribution
0.5 0.5
ASCE 41-06 estimates
Number of Tests = 39 Number of Tests = 34
0 Standard Deviation = 0.016 0 Standard Deviation = 0.01
0.6 0.6 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, Vy/VO>1.0 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, Vy/VO>1.0
0.5 0.5 1 1

0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5

Number of Tests = 26 Number of Tests = 18
Standard Deviation = 0.0084 Standard Deviation = 0.005

Cumulative Distribution
0.3 0.3 0 0
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06
Number of Tests = 319 Number of Tests = 171 Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, Vy/VO  0.6 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, Vy/VO  0.6
0.2 0.2 1 1
Standard Deviation Equation = 0.015 Standard Deviation Equation = 0.019
0.1 0.1 0.5 0.5
Standard Deviation ASCE41-06 = 0.015 Standard Deviation ASCE41-06 = 0.022 Number of Tests = 47 Number of Tests = 95
0 Standard Deviation = 0.016 0 Standard Deviation = 0.016
0 0 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Error in aR = Experiment - Estimate (rad) Error in aC = Experiment - Estimate (rad) Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, 0.6<Vy/VO  1.0 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, 0.6<Vy/VO  1.0
1 1

0.5 0.5
Number of Tests = 11 Number of Tests = 6

• Median estimate achieved 0 Standard Deviation = 0.018 0 Standard Deviation = 0.016

-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, Vy/VO>1.0 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, Vy/VO>1.0
• Improved fit for circular columns 1
Proposed Equation
1

0.5 ASCE 41-06 Sup 1 Table 0.5

Number of Tests = 1 Number of Tests = 0
0 Standard Deviation = 0 0
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06
Error in aR = Experiment - Estimate (rad) Error in aR = Experiment - Estimate (rad)

MP for RC columns – a MP for RC columns – a

 Analysis of fit  Analysis of fit
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, V y/V O  0.6 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, V y/VO  0.6
1 1

0.5 0.5 0.08 0.08

Number of Tests = 40 Number of Tests = 8
0 Standard Deviation = 0.027 0 Standard Deviation = 0.018 135 o hooks spirals
Error in aR = Experiment - Estimate (rad)

Error in aC = Experiment - Estimate (rad)

-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 lapped
90o hooks
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, 0.6<V y/V O  1.0 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, 0.6<Vy/VO  1.0 0.06 0.06 Unknown
Unknown
1 1

0.5 0.5
Number of Tests = 27 Number of Tests = 5 0.04 0.04
0 Standard Deviation = 0.015 0 Standard Deviation = 0.0046
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, V y/V O>1.0 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio  0.006, V y/VO>1.0
1 1 0.02 0.02
0.5 0.5
Number of Tests = 46 Number of Tests = 8
Standard Deviation = 0.0099 Standard Deviation = 0.0094 0
0 0 0
Cumulative Distribution

-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, Vy/V O  0.6 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, V y/VO  0.6
1 1
-0.02 -0.02
0.5 0.5
Number of Tests = 13 Number of Tests = 20
0 Standard Deviation = 0.029 0 Standard Deviation = 0.018
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
-0.04 -0.04
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, 0.6<V y/V O  1.0 Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, 0.6<Vy/VO  1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
1 1 Rectangular column s/d Circular column s/d
Proposed Equation
0.5 0.5 ASCE 41-06 Sup 1 Table
Number of Tests = 3 Number of Tests = 1
0 Standard Deviation = 0.024 0 Standard Deviation = 0
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Axial Load Ratio  0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, V y/V O>1.0
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06
Axial Load Ratio>0.2, Transv. Reinf. Ratio>0.006, V y/VO>1.0
0.08
• Little bias with respect to s/d
1 1
• Little bias with respect to tie hooks
0.5 0.5
Number of Tests = 0 Number of Tests = 0
0 0
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Error in a = Experiment - Estimate (rad) Error in a = Experiment - Estimate (rad)
C C

MP for RC columns – b MP for RC columns – b

 Behavioral model  Analysis of fit
 Due to the scarcity of columns tested to axial collapse a behavioral-
model is selected instead of a regression-based model

 Simplified Elwood-Moehle axial failure model

∆ 0.5
Drift ratio at axial failure
5

4
 5/5/2014

MP for RC columns – b MP for RC columns – b

 Analysis of fit  Analysis of fit
 Using full database
• Including a loading protocol
factor of 0.5 on the drift at axial
0.14 0.14
failure for columns tested under Tests not to axial collapse
Tests to axial collapse
Tests not to axial collapse
Tests to axial collapse
6 load cycle per drift level or bi- 0.12 0.12

Proposed behavioral model b (rad)

Proposed behavioral model b (rad)

axially 0.1 0.1

0.08 0.08

0.06 0.06

0.04 0.04

Model Average Measured/ Standard Coefficient of

0.02 0.02
Calculated drift Deviation Variation
ratio at axial failure
0 0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
Experimental b2R (rad) Experimental b2C (rad)

ASCE 41-06 Suppl. 1 1.97 0.93 0.47 • Model produces median estimates for rect. and circular columns tested to collapse
Elwood-Moehle 0.97 0.44 0.46
Simplified Elwood –
Moehle with loading 1.13 0.38 0.33
For tests not conduced to collapse either deformation when shear drops to below 25% of maximum or
factor the maximum deformation the test was pushed to are used to evaluate b

ASCE 41-13 versus Proposed MP ASCE 41-13 versus Proposed MP

 MP a  MP b
0.12 0.14
0.05 0.07 Tests not to axial collapse Tests not to axial collapse
Tests to axial collapse Tests to axial collapse
0.045 0.12
Proposed behavioral model b (rad)

Proposed behavioral model b (rad)

0.06 0.1
0.04
0.1
0.035 0.05 0.08
ASCE 41-06 aR (rad)

ASCE 41-06 aC (rad)

0.03 0.08
0.04
0.06
0.025
0.06
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.015 0.04
0.02

0.01 0.02
0.02
0.01
0.005
0 0
0 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 ASCE 41-06 b(rad) ASCE 41-06 b (rad)
Proposed equation aR (rad) Proposed equation aC (rad)

• Shift to median estimates for rectangular columns results in slightly larger estimates • Larger b parameter for most columns
• Large changes for spirally reinforced circular columns that have significantly larger
deformation capacity

Acceptance Criteria Summary

1. MP estimated at median  “best” estimate analyses
 AC defined as percentiles of MP a and b
2. New relations for MP a and b are proposed
 Fixed probability of exceeding a threshold behavior defined by MP a
and b 3. Circular columns with spirals are treated separately
 Significantly higher deformation capacities than rectangular
columns
IO LS Primary CP Primary LS Secondary CP Secondary
4. MP a defined through regression models
Criteria 10% of 20th percentile 35th percentile 10th percentile 25th percentile
MP a of MP a of MP a of MP b of MP b
5. MP b defined through behavioral model due to scarcity of data
Rectangular 0.1 aR 0.50 aR 0.75 aR 0.60 bR 0.75 bR
6. AC criteria are proposed as percentile values of MP estimates
Circular 0.1 aC 0.30 aC 0.65 aC 0.60 bC 0.75 bC  fixed probability of exceeding damage state defined by MP