ctbuh.

org/papers

Title: Energy Dissipation Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Members

Authors: Honggun Park, Associate Professor, Seoul National University

Taesung Eom, Graduate Student, Seoul National University

Subject: Structural Engineering

Keywords: Concrete
Performance Based Design
Seismic

Publication Date: 2004

Original Publication: CTBUH 2004 Seoul Conference

Paper Type: 1. Book chapter/Part chapter

2. Journal paper
3. Conference proceeding
4. Unpublished conference paper
5. Magazine article
6. Unpublished

© Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat / Honggun Park; Taesung Eom
 Energy Dissipation Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Members

Honggun Park1 Taesung Eom2

1
Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Seoul National University
2
Graduate Student, Department of Architecture, Seoul National University

Abstract
As advanced earthquake analysis/design methods are developed, it is required to estimate precisely the cyclic
behavior of reinforced concrete members that is characterized by strength, deformability, and energy dissipation
capacity. However, presently, energy dissipation capacity is estimated by either empirical equations which are not
sufficiently accurate, or experiments and sophisticated numerical analysis which are difficult to use in practice. In
the present study, a simplified method to estimate the energy dissipation capacity of reinforced concrete members
was developed, and was verified by the comparisons with existing experiments on beams, columns, structural wall,
and coupling beams. The proposed method can accurately estimate the energy dissipation capacity of the member
considering various design variables such as reinforcement ratio and arrangement, axial compression, and
sectional shape, though the overall cyclic curve complicated by the stiffness degradation and pinching is not
known. An example of nonlinear static and dynamic analysis using the proposed method was presented.

Keywords: energy dissipation capacity; earthquake design, performance-based design, cyclic behavior; reinforced concrete

1. Introduction ratio, arrangement of reinforcing bars, and shape and

Recently, performance-based methods for size of the members’ cross-sections. Therefore, such
earthquake design were developed. [1, 2] To use such empirical methods cannot precisely estimate the
advanced methods, it is necessary to estimate energy dissipation capacity, and as a result, they
precisely the cyclic behavior of structural members reduce the overall accuracy of the evaluation method.
which is represented by three primary ingredients: For economical and safe seismic design, simple but
strength, deformability, and energy dissipation sufficiently accurate methods for estimating energy
capacity (per load cycle) (Fig. 1). Generally, dissipation capacity are needed.
reinforced concrete members show complex cyclic
behavior with stiffness degradation and pinching.
strength
Therefore, the evaluation of seismic performance of
RC members is usually limited to strength and
deformability. The estimation of energy dissipation
capacity depends on empirical equations that are not
sufficiently accurate, or on nonlinear numerical deformability
analysis that is difficult to use. energy dissipation
For example, in the Capacity-Spectrum-Method of
ATC-40 [1], a nonlinear static analytical method,
structures are classified into three categories
according to their expected capacity of energy Fig. 1. Cyclic Behavior of R/C members; Strength, eformability,
dissipation. The energy dissipation capacity Ekh is and Energy Dissipation
obtained by assuming that the structure displays a
linearized kinematic hardening behavior (Fig. 2). Then, 2. Energy Dissipation Capacity of
the actual energy dissipation capacity ED is Reinforced Concrete Members
calculated by multiplying the empirical ratios of 0.33, A reinforced concrete member dissipates energy by
0.67, or 1.0 to Ekh which is prescribed by the category experiencing inelastic behavior during cyclic loading.
of the structure. Generally, energy dissipation capacity Since the reinforced concrete member is composed of
depends on various parameters such as reinforcement concrete and reinforcing steel, its energy dissipation
can be defined by the sum of the energy dissipated by
Contact Author: Honggun Park, Associate Professor, Seoul concrete and reinforcing steel.
National University, San 56-1, Shinlim-dong, Kwanak-gu,
Seoul, 151-742, Korea
Tel: 82-2-880-7055 Fax: 82-2-871-5518
e-mail: parkhg@snu.ac.kr

378 CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

 Force
σs
(ε y , fy )

UD
ε2
ED Deformation ε1 εs

ED = κ Ekh Bauschinger
Ekh effect

Fig. 2. Definition of Energy Dissipation by ATC-40 [1] Fig. 4. Strain Energy Density of Re-Bars

Then, the energy dissipated by re-bars showing

ED = Econcrete + Esteel
where ED = total energy dissipated by the reinforced
concrete member during cyclic loading, Econcrete ,
Esteel = the energy dissipated by concrete and
reinforcing steel, respectively.
Fig. 3 shows the cyclic behavior of plain concrete
and reinforcing steel. [3-5] Concrete is a brittle
material composed of aggregates and matrix.
Therefore, if cyclic loading is repeated at a specific
displacement, concrete dissipates considerably less
energy than reinforcing steel exhibiting plastic
behavior does, as observed in many experiments.(see
Fig. 3) For the reason, the overall dissipated energy of
the member is equivalent to the sum of the energy
dissipated by re-bars arranged in the member.
ED ≅ Esteel
σc
f c′
1
(ε co , f c′)
0.5
(1) large plastic behavior during cyclic loading can be
calculated as follows. (Fig. 4)
U D = 2 RB f y ( ε1 − ε 2 − 2ε y ) (3)
where U D = strain energy density of re-bar, f y , ε y =
yield stress and strain of re-bar, ε1 , ε 2 = maximum
and minimum strains, RB = reduction factor
representing the Bauschinger effect, which is
approximately set to 0.75. [5] Since the re-bar does
not dissipate energy in the elastic range, U D is equal
to zero if ε1 − ε 2 − 2ε y < 0 .
If Eq. (2) is acceptable, the overall energy
dissipation capacity of the reinforced concrete
member can be evaluated using the energy dissipated
by re-bars without knowing the complex cyclic
behavior. And, as shown in Eq. (3) and Fig. 4, the
(2) energy dissipated by re-bars can be calculated with the
amount of re-bars and the differential strains ε1 − ε 2
(or deformations) which the re-bars experience during
cyclic loading.
However, it should be noted that for the member
subjected to excessively high axial compressive load,
concrete dissipates considerable energy because a
large volume of concrete contributes to resist the axial
load.

0 3. Flexure-Dominated R/C Members

0 1 2 3 ε c ε co 3.1 Energy dissipated during cyclic loading
(a) Cyclic compression test of conrete [3] Fig. 5 shows profiles of maximum and minimum
strains for a rectangular cross-section with symmetric
σs (ε , fy ) re-bar arrangement, developed during cyclic loading.
y
1.2f y To develop a simple equation, as shown in the figure,
the re-bars were idealized as uniformly distributed
0.6
re-bars with reinforcement ratio ρ w and boundary
0 re-bars with cross-sectional area As arranged at both
-0.6
ends. For the distributed re-bars, the differential strain
at a distance x from the centroid of the cross section
-1.2 is 2φu x , and U D is calculated by substituting 2φu x
-2 0 2 4 ε s 6ε y for ε1 − ε 2 in Eq. (3).
(b) Cyclic stress-strain curve [5] However, the re-bars located in 0 ≤ x ≤ ε y φu
remain elastically and do not dissipate energy: U D
Fig. 3. Cyclic Behavior of Concrete and Re-bar should be zero for 0 ≤ x ≤ ε y φu . U D of the

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 379

boundary re-bars is obtained by substituting behavior in positive and negative directions. If the
( 2φu )( hs 2 ) for ε1 − ε 2 in Eq. (3). The dissipated member is subjected to asymmetric cyclic behavior,
energy eD of a rectangular cross-section (Fig. 6) can the energy dissipation capacity can be obtained using
be calculated by integrating the energy density U D the average curvature in two opposite directions.
over the entire cross-section. Like the rectangular section, for the circular section
and for the beam or T-beam with asymmetric re-bar
arrangement, the energy dissipation capacity can be
eD = ∫ U D ρ ( x ) dA estimated using the differential strains of re-bars.
A
The energy dissipation capacity ED of a plastic
= 2 RB ( 2 f y ) ∫ ( 2φ x − 2ε ) ρ
h/2

ε y φu u y w dx (4) hinge is calculated as (Fig. 6).

 h 
+ 2 RB ( 2 f y )  2φu s − 2ε y  As
 2  ED = eD l p (6)

where ρ = reinforcement ratio for total re-bars, where l p = length of the plastic hinge. The length of a
b, h = width and depth of the rectangular cross-section, plastic hinge at the base is approximately h 2 . [2, 7]
φu = maximum curvature, and hs = distance between When plastic hinges are developed at both ends of a
the re-bar layers located at the boundaries. In Eq. (4), member, the energy dissipation capacity of the
the first and second terms represent the energy member is the sum of energy dissipated at the both
dissipated by the distributed re-bars and the boundary hinges.
re-bars, respectively. Eq. (4) can be redefined with
p = ρ w ρ (see Fig. 5): 3.2 Verification
Table 2 compares the results of a variety of
experiments and the values predicted by the proposed
εy   1 εy  
2
 1 h method. The dimensions and material properties for
eD = 4 RB ρ f y bh 2φu (1 − p )  s −  + p  −   (5)
  2 h φu h   2 φu h   each specimen are presented in references. [8~13] The
energy dissipation capacities and the damping
h modification factors are presented in the table. In the
b Reinforcement Ratio ρ Capacity-Spectrum-Method, the damping
ρw 1 modification factor is fixed to prescribed values in
p= , As = (1 − p ) ρ bh accordance with the expected energy dissipation
hs ρ 2
capacity (Fig. 2), but in the proposed method it varies
ranging from 0.314 to 0.693, depending on the design
ρw
As parameters. The average and the standard deviation of
As 2φu x the ratio of energy dissipation capacity are 0.984 and
εy 0.084, respectively. The values for ratio of the
2φu
x φu damping modification factor are 0.991and 0.085. In
h/2 the present study, as mentioned, several
2ε y simplifications were used to develop a practical
ε =0
method: Energy dissipated by concrete was neglected,
Fig. 5. Evaluation of Energy Dissipation Capacity for the and the strain profiles in the web of the cross-section
Cross-Section were simplified. Furthermore, deformations due to
shear-action, bond-slip, and pedestal rotation that
might affect the energy dissipation capacity were not
M included. However, the comparisons presented in
P ∆u
Table 2 showed that despite of such negative effects of
−φu P
the simplification, the proposed method predicts well
φu the dissipated energy and the damping modification
eD −∆u factor.
M - φ Curve In the proposed equations, contribution of the
at plastic hinge ∆u lateral re-bars confining the core concrete was not
lp φu ED included in the estimation of the energy dissipation
capacity (per load cycle). Since the stress and strain of
Curvature distribution Cyclic Curve ties and stirrups are developed only by the concrete in
compression, the stress and strain of the lateral re-bars
Fig. 6. Evaluation of Energy Dissipation Capacity for R/C remain in tension during repeated cyclic loadings.
Member
Eq. (5) was derived assuming symmetric cyclic

380 CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

 Table 2. Comparisons between Experimental and Analytical Results: Flexure-Dominated Members
Shear Axial Prediction Experiments Ratio
Re- Section comp.
Specimen Type span
searchers shape** P Ag f c′ ED(1)*** κ (2) ED (3) κ (4) (1)/(3) (2)/(4)
ratio
88-32-RV10-60* Beam R 5.00 0.00 13940 0.691 12710 0.693 1.097 0.997
Brown &
88-35-RV10-60* Beam R 5.00 0.00 18430 0.693 16850 0.752 1.094 0.922
Jirsa [8]
66-35-RV10-60* Beam R 5.00 0.00 8115 0.654 8086 0.751 1.004 0.871
OIN Han&Lee[9] Col. R 4.55 0.28 1511 0.314 1500 0.322 1.007 0.975
N4 Col. C 3.00 0.10 4179 0.510 4546 0.498 0.916 1.024
Cheok &
N5 Col. C 3.00 0.20 4044 0.439 4784 0.460 0.845 0.954
Stone [10]
N6 Col. C 6.00 0.10 2760 0.503 3220 0.536 0.857 0.938
A1 Col. R 3.83 0.10 57070 0.434 53880 0.450 1.056 0.964
A2 Wehbe et. Col. R 3.83 0.24 45900 0.405 46000 0.404 0.998 1.000
B1 Al. [11] Col. R 3.83 0.09 66000 0.452 66940 0.489 0.986 0.924
B2 Col. R 3.83 0.23 62090 0.404 66770 0.426 0.930 0.948
BG-3 Col. R 4.70 0.20 10600 0.348 11810 0.345 0.898 1.009
BG-5 Col. R 4.70 0.47 16110 0.433 17040 0.413 0.945 1.048
Saatchioglu
BG-6 Col. R 4.70 0.46 15860 0.435 15860 0.359 1.000 1.212
& Grira [12]
BG-7 Col. R 4.70 0.47 16420 0.434 17910 0.418 0.917 1.038
BG-8 Col. R 4.70 0.24 16260 0.424 13390 0.361 1.178 1.175
RW1 Thomsen & Wall R 3.12 0.10 11860 0.384 12490 0.424 0.950 0.906
RW2 Wallace [13] Wall R 3.12 0.07 11860 0.378 11560 0.402 1.026 0.940
* Asymmetric Cyclic Tests ** R: Rectangular C: Circular *** kN-mm

Therefore, the confining re-bars do not experience full
cycles of strain history during cyclic loading repeated
at specific displacements, and as the result, they
dissipate little energy. For the reason, the effect of the
confining re-bars on the energy dissipation capacity
(per load cycle) was neglected in the present study.
However, both the lateral re-bars and the confined
concrete dissipate energy during loading increasing
displacements.
4. Shear-Dominated R/C Members: Coupling
Beams
4.1 Energy dissipated during cyclic loading
The coupled wall connecting two individual walls
using coupling beams is popularly used as a structural
system for high-rise buildings because it can provide
large lateral stiffness and strength. Structural
performances of coupled walls such as strength,
deformability, and energy dissipation capacity are
dominated by capacities of coupling beams
experiencing large inelastic deformation during cyclic
loading.
Coupling beams with conventional re-bar
arrangement, horizontal and vertical re-bar
arrangement, cannot dissipate considerable energy due
to excessive pinching during cyclic behavior, and have
less deformability due to shear and bond deterioration.
(Fig. 7 (a)) To enhance deformability and shear
capacity of coupling beams, diagonal re-bar
arrangement was introduced in late 1960’s [14, 15],
and now design codes such as ACI 318-02 and EC8
recommend that in high seismic zone coupling beams
be reinforced by diagonal re-bars. As shown in Fig. 7
(b), coupling beams reinforced by diagonal re-bars
dissipate significant energy during cyclic loading not
exhibiting pinching. In the present study, a practical
method evaluating energy dissipation capacity of
coupling beams reinforced by diagonal re-bars was
developed.
For evaluation of energy dissipation capacity, as
mentioned in ‘Energy Dissipation Capacity of
Reinforced Members,’ deformations of re-bars
developed during cyclic loading should be estimated.
For the purpose, the coupling beam reinforced by
X-type diagonal re-bars was idealized as very simple
analogous truss as shown in Fig. 8. Vertical and
horizontal re-bars are neglected because their
sectional area is much less compared with diagonal
re-bars. Lateral displacement and axial elongation
developed during inelastic behavior were denoted as
u (> 0) and v (> 0), respectively. Then, the axial
shortening ecs of concrete strut can be calculated as
ecs = −u sin α + v cos α (6)
where α is angle of concrete strut.
Generally the axial shortening ecs of concrete strut
is much less than axial elongation of re-bars.
Therefore, approximately, ecs can be set to 0. That is,
h
v ≈ u tan α = u (7)
l
where l = length of coupling beam, h = distance
between two diagonal re-bars at top and bottom faces.
(Fig. 8)
From Eq. (7), the maximum and minimum strains
of diagonal re-bars, ε 1 and ε 2 , experiencing during
cyclic loading can be calculated as

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 381

 300 300

150 150

Shear(kN)
Shear(kN)

0 0

-150 -150

Rotation
-300 -300
-0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08 -0.08 -0.04 0.00 0.04 0.08
Rotation(rad) Rotation(rad)
(a) Conventional Re-bar Arrangement (b) Diagonal Re-bar Arrangement
Fig. 7. Cyclic Load-Deflection Curves of Coupling Beams [16]

As Concrete Strut
As u u
Tie
h

α
v v

Specimen Tie Members Analogous Truss

Fig. 8. Analogous Truss Model for Coupling Beams

Table 3. Comparisons between Experimental and Analytical Results: Coupling Beams

As fy h l u Eq. (10) Experiments Ratio
Specimen Researchers
mm2 MPa mm mm mm ED (kN-mm) ED (kN-mm) Eq.(10)/Exp.
P07 314 567 260 600 15 4390 4380 1.00
P08 314 567 260 600 14 3960 4090 0.97
Galano & Vignoli [16]
P11 314 567 240 600 14 3600 3120 1.15
P12 314 567 240 600 14 3600 3220 1.12
N1 803 476 310 1000 25 11270 9970 1.13
N2 803 459 310 1000 25 11070 10670 1.04
N5 803 459 310 1000 25 11070 11390 0.97
Shimazaki [17]
N6 803 386 310 1000 25 10710 10420 1.03
N7 803 380 310 1000 25 11010 11010 1.00
N8 803 383 310 1000 25 11030 9360 1.18
* Asymmetric Cyclic Tests ** R: Rectangular C: Circular *** kN-mm

u sin α + v cos α 2u  2u 
ε1 = = , ε2 = 0 (8) ED = 4 f y As l 2 + d 2  2 − 2ε y  (10)
l +h2 2 l + h2
2
l +d
2


Strain energy density of diagonal re-bars can be where As = sectional area of diagonal re-bars.
calculated by using Eq. (3) and (8). Eq. (10) was derived assuming symmetric re-bar
details and cyclic behavior. If coupling beams are
reinforced by diagonal re-bars with different areas and
 2u  are subject to asymmetric cyclic loading, different
UD = 2 fy  2 − 2ε y  (9)
l +d
2
 strain histories can be developed in each diagonal
re-bar. In that case, the energy dissipation capacity can
be obtained by summing the energy of each diagonal
The amount of diagonal re-bars is 2 As l 2 + d 2 . re-bar, which is individually calculated using the
Therefore, the energy dissipation capacity ED can be maximum and minimum strains that each diagonal
calculated as re-bar experiences during cyclic loading.

382 CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

4.2 Verification method predicts the dissipated energy accurately
Table 3 compares the energies calculated by Eq. though it is simple and does not consider shear and
(10) with experimental results. The dimensions and bond deterioration that might affect the energy
material properties for specimens are briefly presented dissipation capacity.
in Table 3. As shown in the table, the proposed method
5. Application of the Proposed Method
Table 4. Dimensions and Properties of Beams and Columns The simplified method to estimate the energy
Member
Width Depth Reinforcement dissipation capacity of the flexure-dominated R/C
b, mm h, mm ρ t (%) ρ b (%) member was applied to the nonlinear static and
1-3 floors 700 700 1.0 1.0 dynamic analysis. Fig. 9 and Table 4 present the
Columns 4-6 floors 600 600 1.0 1.0 configuration of the R/C frame, dimensions of each
7-10 floors 500 500 1.0 1.0 member, and material properties. Two lateral load
Beams All floors 400 600 1.0 0.75 profiles of triangular distribution and uniform
distribution for the nonlinear static analysis were used
b as shown in Fig. 9. El Centro 1940(PGA=0.319g) and
Northridge CA 1994(PGA=0.412g) were used as the
At ρt =
At
Material properties: earthquake record for the analysis.
bh
h A
f y = 400 MPa The Capacity-Spectrum-Method was used for
ρb = b f c′ = 27 MPa
Ab bh nonlinear static analysis. The proposed method and
wD = 32.9 kN/m
the empirical method proposed in ATC-40 were used
Dimensions 3@ 7000 mm wL = 17.2 kN/m to estimate the energy dissipation capacity. In the
proposed method, as shown in Fig. 10, the energy
capacity curve presenting the relation of the top
displacement of the structure and the energy
dissipated by complete cyclic behavior was
constructed. In the energy capacity curve, the
10@ 4000 mm
variation of energy dissipation capacity is defined by
the function of displacement. In the CSM, the
damping modification factor is fixed to a prescribed
value. On the other hand, in the proposed method, the
energy dissipation capacity varies depending on the
Load case 1, 2 Configuration of the R / C frame design parameters and the displacement.
For time-history nonlinear analysis, energy-based
Fig. 9. 10-Story R/C Frame for the Nonlinear Static and bilinear cyclic model was developed. (Fig. 10) The
Dynamic Analysis model was devised so as to dissipate the same energy

V Capacity Curve
∆i Vi
M

θ
EDi (12)
∆i ∆
M ED
EDi = ∑ EDi ( j )
j
EDi
EDi ( 6)
θ

∆i ∆
Vi Energy Capacity Curve
Fig.10. Energy Capacity for the Capacity-Spectrum-Method

Table 5. Results by Nonlinear Static and Dynamic Analyses

Proposed Method ATC-40 * Nonlinear Dynamic
Load case 1 Load case 2 Load case 1 Load case 2 Analyses
Top displacement (mm) 242 240 223 202 248
El Centro 1940 Base shear (kN) 886 1106 873 1057 1191
Northridge CA Top displacement (mm) 298 328 279 290 357
1994 Base shear (kN) 919 1189 909 1156 1394
* Damping modification factor is 0.67

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 383

as the actual behavior during complete load cycle
though the unloading- reloading behavior is different
from the actual one.
The top displacements and base shears obtained by
the CSM and dynamic analysis were presented in
Table 5. For the dynamic analysis, the maximum
responses during seismic behavior were presented. As
presented in the table, the proposed method using the
simplified method predicts better those of the
nonlinear dynamic analysis, regardless of the lateral
load profiles and earthquake records.
6. Conclusions
Concrete which is a brittle material does not
dissipate energy significantly during repeated cyclic
loading. Therefore, the energy dissipation of the
reinforced concrete member is almost the same as the
energy dissipated by flexural re-bars arranged in the
member. Energy dissipation capacity of RC members
can be determined by the amount of re-bars and the
differential stains that the re-bars experience during
cyclic loading. In the present study, a practical method
for estimating the energy dissipation capacity was
developed and verified by the comparisons with
existing experiments. The proposed method can
accurately estimate the energy dissipation capacity
considering the reinforcement ratio and arrangement,
axial compression, and ductility, without knowing the
overall cyclic curve complicated by stiffness
degradation and pinching. The proposed method is
applicable to the existing nonlinear static and dynamic
analysis.
Acknowledgement
This research (03 R&D C04-01 and 04 Core
Technique C02-02) was financially supported by the
Ministry of Construction & Transportation of South
Korea and Korea Institute of Construction &
Transportation Technology Evaluation and Planning,
and the authors are grateful to the authorities for their
support.
384 CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea
References
1) ATC (1996) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings.
ATC-40. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California.
2) Building Seismic Safety Council (1997) NEHRP guidelines for the
seismic rehabilitation of buildings. FEMA-273. Federal
Emergency Management Council, Washington, D.C.
3) S. Okamoto, S. Shiomi, and K. Yamabe (1976) Earthquake
Resistance of Prestressed Concrete Structures. Proceedings,
Annual Convention, AIJ, 647-665
4) B. P. Sinha, Kurt H. Gerstle, and Leonard G. Tulin (1964)
Stress-Strain Relations for Concrete under Cyclic Loading. ACI
Journal, Proceedings, 61(2), 195-212
5) M. Seckin (1981) Hysteretic behavior of cast-in-place exterior
beam-column sub-assembles. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Toronto,
266
6) H. Park and R. E. Klingner (1997) Nonlinear Analysis of RC
Members Using Plasticity with Multiple Failure Criteria. Journal
of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 123(5), 643-651
7) M. J. N. Priestley (2000) Performance Based Seismic Design.
Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand
8) R. H. Brown and J. O. Jirsa (2001) Reinforced Concrete Beams
under Load Reversals. ACI Structural Journal, 68(5), 380-390
9) S. Han and L. Lee (2002) Seismic Behavior of OMRCF Columns.
Journal of the Korea Concrete Institute, 14(2), 199-206
10) G. S. Cheok and W. C. Stone (1990) Behavior of 1/6-Scale Model
Bridge Columns Subjected to Inelastic Cyclic Loading. ACI
Structural Journal, 87(6), 630-638
11) N. I. Wehbe, M. S. Saiidi, and D. H. Sanders (1999) Seismic
Performance of Rectangular Bridge Columns with Moderate
Confinement. ACI Structural Journal, 96(2), 248-258
12) M. Saatchioglu and M. Grira (1999) Confinement of Reinforced
Concrete Columns with Welded Reinforcement Grids. ACI
Structural Journal, 96(4), 29-39
13) J. H. Thomsen and J. W. Wallace (1996) Displacement-based
design of RC structural walls: An experimental investigation of
walls with rectangular and T-shaped cross-sections. Report No.
CU/CEE-95/06
14) Park, R. and T. Paulay (1975) Reinforced Concrete Structures.
John Wiley & Sons, 645-660
15) Paulay, T (1971) Simulated Seismic Loading of Spandrel Beams.
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, 97(9), 2407-2419
16) Galano, L. and Vignoli, A. (2000) Seismic Behavior of Short
Coupling Beams with Different Reinforcement Layouts. ACI
Structural Journal, 97(6), 876-885
17) Shimazaki, K. (2004) De-Bonded Diagonally Reinforced Beam for
Good Repairability. Proceedings of 13th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. 3173