4.6 Article

Evolution of national codes for the design of RC structures in Romania

Journal

BULLETIN OF EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10518-023-01791-y

Keywords

Romanian design codes; Reinforced concrete; Moment frames; Shear walls; Large panels; Bending moment design; Shear force design

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study provides an overview of the design of reinforced concrete structures in Romania and its impact on seismic exposure and vulnerability. The focus is on the design of structural elements for bending moment and shear force, as well as the requirements imposed by various codes. The study examines the use of material- and element-oriented design codes, as well as economic constraints on the design process. It also presents key observations on the seismic behavior of different structural types.
This study presents an overview of the design of reinforced concrete (RC) structures (moment frames, shear walls and large panels) for Romania and the impact on seismic exposure and vulnerability within the context of the recent European Seismic Risk Model 2020 (ESRM20). The overview is focused on the design of structural elements for bending moment and shear force, as well as on the constructive and detailing requirements imposed by various codes. The design of RC structures in Romania over the past century involved the use of material- and element-oriented design codes, besides the seismic design code. In addition, economic constraints regarding the material (steel) consumption influenced considerably the design process. The observations made from various literature sources regarding the design and construction practice in Romania are used for a better understanding and evaluation of the seismic exposure and vulnerability. In addition, the key observations regarding the seismic behaviour of each particular structural type are also presented.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available