地震工程中的神话与谬误——设计与现实的冲突

M. Priestley
{"title":"地震工程中的神话与谬误——设计与现实的冲突","authors":"M. Priestley","doi":"10.14359/983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Current practice in seismic analysis and design is examined, with particular reference to reinforced concrete structures. The attitude of the paper is deliberately iconoclastic, tilting at targets it is hoped will not be seen as windmills. It is suggested that the current emphasis on strength-based design and ductility leads us in directions that are not always rational. A pure displacement-based design approach is advanced as a viable alternative. Improvements resulting from increased sophistication of analyses are seen to be largely illusory. Energy absorption is shown to be a mixed blessing. Finally, accepted practices for flexural design, shear design, development of reinforcement, and the philosophic basis of capacity design are questioned.","PeriodicalId":305630,"journal":{"name":"SP-157: Recent Developments In Lateral Force Transfer In Buildings","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"294","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Myths and Fallacies in Earthquake Engineering--Conflicts Between Design and Reality\",\"authors\":\"M. Priestley\",\"doi\":\"10.14359/983\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Current practice in seismic analysis and design is examined, with particular reference to reinforced concrete structures. The attitude of the paper is deliberately iconoclastic, tilting at targets it is hoped will not be seen as windmills. It is suggested that the current emphasis on strength-based design and ductility leads us in directions that are not always rational. A pure displacement-based design approach is advanced as a viable alternative. Improvements resulting from increased sophistication of analyses are seen to be largely illusory. Energy absorption is shown to be a mixed blessing. Finally, accepted practices for flexural design, shear design, development of reinforcement, and the philosophic basis of capacity design are questioned.\",\"PeriodicalId\":305630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SP-157: Recent Developments In Lateral Force Transfer In Buildings\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1995-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"294\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SP-157: Recent Developments In Lateral Force Transfer In Buildings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14359/983\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SP-157: Recent Developments In Lateral Force Transfer In Buildings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14359/983","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 294

摘要

目前的做法,抗震分析和设计进行了审查,特别是参考钢筋混凝土结构。《华尔街日报》的态度是有意打破传统,把矛头指向那些它希望不会被视为“风车”的目标。这表明,目前强调基于强度的设计和延性导致我们的方向并不总是合理的。纯基于位移的设计方法是一种可行的替代方案。由于分析的复杂性增加而产生的改进在很大程度上被认为是虚幻的。能量吸收被证明是一件好坏参半的事情。最后,对抗弯设计、抗剪设计、配筋发展和承载力设计的哲学基础提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Myths and Fallacies in Earthquake Engineering--Conflicts Between Design and Reality
Current practice in seismic analysis and design is examined, with particular reference to reinforced concrete structures. The attitude of the paper is deliberately iconoclastic, tilting at targets it is hoped will not be seen as windmills. It is suggested that the current emphasis on strength-based design and ductility leads us in directions that are not always rational. A pure displacement-based design approach is advanced as a viable alternative. Improvements resulting from increased sophistication of analyses are seen to be largely illusory. Energy absorption is shown to be a mixed blessing. Finally, accepted practices for flexural design, shear design, development of reinforcement, and the philosophic basis of capacity design are questioned.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信