Seismic Capacity Comparison between Square and Circular Plan Adobe Construction

UTSePress Research/Manakin Repository

Search UTSePress Research


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Samali, Bijan en_US
dc.contributor.author Jinwuth, Watcharin en_US
dc.contributor.author Heathcote, Kevan en_US
dc.contributor.author Wang, Changxin en_US
dc.contributor.editor NA en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2012-10-12T03:36:31Z
dc.date.available 2012-10-12T03:36:31Z
dc.date.issued 2011 en_US
dc.identifier 2011004498 en_US
dc.identifier.citation Samali Bijan et al. 2011, 'Seismic Capacity Comparison between Square and Circular Plan Adobe Construction', , Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, , pp. 2103-2108. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1877-7058 en_US
dc.identifier.other E1 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10453/19281
dc.description.abstract Unreinforced adobe or mud-brick structures have in the past suffered severe damage from seismic forces and have caused a vast number of deaths. However, a number of adobe buildings located in seismic regions have performed well under several seismic events. Most of these traditional buildings? shapes are symmetrical which has significant bearing on the performance of the building during strong earthquakes. This paper presents an experimental comparison between two symmetrical shapes, i.e., a square and a circular model of unreinforced adobe walls. One-third scale models were built and tested using a static tilt test for seismic performance evaluation of both structures. The adobe house models were subjected to a constant acceleration when tilted on a tilt-up table. The lateral component of model weight was used as a parameter to quantify the maximum seismic force for each model. The paper describes the configuration of both specimens and testing method. The results of these comparative experiments indicated a better performance of the circular structure. There are simple and effective solutions for construction of new adobe buildings located in seismic hazard areas which can assist in decreasing damage and death. en_US
dc.language en_US
dc.publisher Elsevier en_US
dc.relation.hasversion Accepted manuscript version en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.07.264, en_US
dc.rights NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Procedia Engineering. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Procedia Engineering, [Volume 14, 2011, Pages 2103–2108] DOI# http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.07.264 en_US
dc.title Seismic Capacity Comparison between Square and Circular Plan Adobe Construction en_US
dc.parent Procedia Engineering, The Proceedings of the Twelfth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction ? EASEC12 en_US
dc.journal.volume 14 en_US
dc.journal.number en_US
dc.publocation Amsterdam, The Netherlands en_US
dc.identifier.startpage 2103 en_US
dc.identifier.endpage 2108 en_US
dc.cauo.name FEIT.Faculty of Engineering & Information Technology en_US
dc.conference Verified OK en_US
dc.for 090500 en_US
dc.personcode 870186 en_US
dc.personcode 10616833 en_US
dc.personcode 890078 en_US
dc.personcode 020001 en_US
dc.percentage 100 en_US
dc.classification.name Civil Engineering en_US
dc.classification.type FOR-08 en_US
dc.edition en_US
dc.custom East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction en_US
dc.date.activity 20110126 en_US
dc.location.activity Hong Kong en_US
dc.description.keywords Adobe construction; mud-brick; earthquake resistance; circular building; tilt table test en_US
dc.staffid 020001 en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record