1 minute read
Pseudo-static tests :
Specimen-1 Specimen-2 Specimen-3 Specimen-4 Specimen-6 Specimen-5
Advertisement
Type 1: Length (L) : 4.00 m
Width (B) :0.45 m
Height (H): 1.00 m
Type 2: Length (L) : 4.00 m
Width (B) : 0.60 m
Height (H): 1.50 m
Collapse Mechanisms:
Type 1 failure:partial or total delamination of the cross-section and overturning of the delaminated section
(the frontal face begins to separate from the back face, and then the first one rotates)
Delamination:
Note: The collapse mechanism focuses on the 2D effect presented in the cross section.
Delamination is similar to a break or cut running along a surface perpendicular to the cross-section.
Collapse Mechanisms:
Type 2 failure : displacement of a section by partial or total delamination
Note: The collapse mechanism focuses on the 2D effect presented in the cross section.
Collapse Mechanisms:
Type 3 failure : overturning of the entire (or almost) wall section
Results:
• Traditional pircas are not safety for an occasional earthquake in Lima City
• Experimental results have shown that the primary collapse mechanism in pircas is due to delamination and block-overturning of the walls. The behavior in both cases is fragile since there is slight displacement before collapse (the average drift related to delamination is 1.4% and 1.6% for overturning).
• For the 1 m height walls, the lack of Through stones causes the wall’s delamination. It was measured with an initial stiffness reduction of up to 60 % .
• It is necessary to carry out more studies to find the most optimal arrangement (transverse and longitudinal configuration) that improves the behavior of the pircas.
Pircas are the most vulnerable part of the houses in Lima’s hills
Can we improve the out-of-plane performance of pircas by improving the construction technique?
Three wall arrangements were considered
Collapse mechanisms obtained:
