Response of High-Strength Steel Reinforced Concrete Structures to Simulated Earthquakes

<p>This dataset contains data from dynamic tests of four reinforced concrete portal frames. The frames were tested on the unidirectional earthquake simulator at Bowen Laboratory for Large-Scale Civil Engineering Research during the fall of 2015.</p> <p>Two each of two types of frame were built. The frames were designed to have the same strength and initial stiffness, but different post-cracking stiffnesses. To achieve this, the frames had the same member dimensions, but different column longitudinal reinforcement. In type C frames, conventional deformed steel reinforcing bars were used at a reinforcement ratio of 1.8%. In type H frames, high-strength smooth steel reinforcing bars were used at a reinforcement ratio of 0.8%. An elevation of the frames and a cross section of the columns is shown below. Note that the out-of-plane thickness was 5 in. throughout.</p> <p><img alt="" src="https://datacenterhub.org/resources/14094/download/Fig_1.png" style="width: 1000px; height: 461px" /></p> <p><img alt="" src="https://datacenterhub.org/resources/14094/download/DSC_0557.JPG" style="width: 1000px; height: 665px" /></p> <p>The frames were tested individually on the earthquake simulator, with excitation in-plane. The ground motion to which they were subjected was modeled after the east-west component of the Roscoe Blvd recording from the 1994 Northridge earthquake. This record was compressed in time and scaled by a factor of 3 to achieve the target "100%" motion. Motions of different intensity were obtained by scaling the amplitude of this “100%” profile.  </p> <p>The frames were tested in two series:</p> <table border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" style="width: 364px"> <tbody> <tr> <td style="width: 77px"><strong>Motion Number</strong></td> <td rowspan="1" style="width: 140px"><strong>Series 1</strong><br /> (Frames C1 & H1)</td> <td rowspan="1" style="width: 133px"><strong>Series 2 </strong><br /> (Frames C2 & H2)</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="width: 77px">1</td> <td style="width: 140px">25%</td> <td style="width: 133px">100%</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="width: 77px">2</td> <td style="width: 140px">50%</td> <td style="width: 133px">75%</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="width: 77px">3</td> <td style="width: 140px">75%</td> <td style="width: 133px">50%</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="width: 77px">4</td> <td style="width: 140px">100%</td> <td style="width: 133px">25%</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="width: 77px">5</td> <td style="width: 140px">100%</td> <td style="width: 133px">100%</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p>The test setup was instrumented with 4 accelerometers, 10 LVDTs, and 64 Optotrak optical markers. Video was recorded from two angles. One camera had in its line of sight an LED that was strobed by the primary data acquisition system. An instrumentation plan is shown below:</p> <p><img alt="" src="https://datacenterhub.org/resources/14094/download/Instrumentation_master.png " style="height: 624px; width: 1000px" /></p> <nb:citations></nb:citations>