info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Crack Licencia Elevental
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Dolores Xiang
Dec 7, 2023, 8:55:51 PM12/7/23
to
A new lead turns up old doubts about an 'Unsolved Case'. A trap, or a copycat killer? In this co-op puzzle game prequel to the award-winning Cryptic Killer series, put on your detective badges as you collaborate and communicate to crack the codes, solve the riddles, and catch the Cryptic Killer.
Crack Licencia Elevental
Download https://t.co/XEJcsPNj8w
Regarding axial load, this variable has a positive effect on the shear strength [14,19,21,25], although higher axial loads are associated with more brittle behaviors and lower deformation capacities [18,25]. In addition, Ramírez et al. [21] indicated that the energy dissipation capacity increases with the axial load. Differently, the effect of axial loads on the crack patterns is not clear since Oan [19] observed variations in the crack-widths and distribution, whereas Meli et al. [17] and Ramírez et al. [21] only observed reductions on the crack-widths.
The effect of the horizontal reinforcement ratio has been the most studied design parameter. In general, it has been reported that the presence of BJR is beneficial for the in-plane behavior of PG-RM shear walls because it provides post-cracking integrity [22,26], as well as capability of energy dissipation and ductility [14,24]. Tomaževič and Lutman [26] indicated that horizontal reinforcement acts only when the panel is diagonally cracked and that its effectiveness depends on the capacity of materials to provided appropriated local anchoring to reinforcement. The authors also pointed out that an increment in the horizontal reinforcement ratio from 0.14% to 0.50% in slender walls (height-to-length ratio of 2.30) shifted the failure mode from shear to flexural. On the other hand, the effect of the horizontal reinforcement on the shear strength is still a subject of research because some authors have observed that shear strength increments with a higher horizontal reinforcement ratio [14,16,21], while others have stated that there is no relationship between them [19,27]. In this aspect, the main function of evenly distributed reinforcement (BJR) is to provide connectivity among cracked zones that usually concentrate in unreinforced sectors of panels [17,19] and ungrouted zones nearby grouted cores [19].
Afterward, progressive degradation of the lateral stiffness can be identified in all walls, where hysteresis cycles became wider as the deformation incremented. In this stage, the first major diagonal crack was identified on the specimens, associated with deformations that ranged from 1.25 to 6.58 mm. These values represented a fraction between 12.4% and 56.3% of the deformation of the maximum load of the corresponding load direction. However, it is important to remark that the major crack could only be observed once it achieved a considerable width. Therefore, this observation does not strictly correspond to the end of the elastic behavior but sets an upper bound and provides information when a certain degree of damage has been reached.
It can be noticed that the highest cracking resistance in each specimen was not always observed in the push loading direction, unlike the maximum resistance. Moreover, the lowest cracking deformation and cracking resistance of each specimen were not always in the same loading direction in all specimens. Therefore, the loading directions of smaller cracking deformation, maximum cracking resistance, and maximum shear strength are not correlated. Besides, it does not seem that the identification of the first major diagonal crack in one loading direction triggers the diagonal cracking in the opposite loading direction because of the ratios between maximum and minimum cracking deformations (δ1crmax/δ1crmin) ranged from 104.3% to 200.6%.
Figure 7d shows the effect of the horizontal reinforcement ratio, where Wall HCBW5 achieved a lower lateral resistance at a lower deformation than the reference walls. Moreover, Wall HCBW5 exhibited a sudden drop in its post-peak lateral resistance. This situation confirms the findings regarding the ability of ladder type-reinforcement to increase the shear strength [14,16,21] and to provide integrity to the compound once cracks have appeared [22,26].
Strain gauge schemes and measurements for the wall HCBW1-A: (a) location of strain gauges, (b) crack pattern at the test end, (c) envelope curve in the push load direction; Envelope curves of the strain gauges in the push load direction at: (d) HR2, (e) HR3, (f) HR4, (g) HR5, (h) HR6, (i) HR7, (j) HR8, and (k) HR9.
Afterward and before reaching the deformation at maximum lateral force, other SGs also exceeded the yield strain of the shear reinforcement (εy,HR), in particular SGs 7, 6, 10, 11, 17, 2, 8, 13, 1, 12, 16, 19, 20, 22, and 24 (sorted according the plasticization sequence). These SGs were not all on the compressed diagonal of the wall, but mainly in the zone below that diagonal, at the locations where cracks were mapped when maximum lateral force was recorded (Figure 8e). Finally, once the wall was losing resistance, strains continued growing in most SGs, especially in those located in the inferior half of the panel. This behavior was mainly due to the extensive damage at both wall toes, which was generated by the compression struts that acted in both load directions, as illustrated in Figure 9b.
On the other hand, Wall HCBW3 exhibited a crack pattern (Figure 10d) very similar to the base Wall HCBW1-A, although it achieved a lateral displacement comparable with Wall HCBW1-B. This situation implies that increasing the width of the blocks decreases the extension of cracks, which provides integrity to the wall in the post-peak regime, as previously discussed.
Figure 10e shows that reducing the vertical reinforcement ratio (ρv) generated a drastic variation on the crack pattern, where damage concentrated in the first four block courses of Wall HCBW4. The lower flexural stiffness allowed a higher rotation of the panel, with a crack pattern that recalls a plastic hinge. Note that plastic hinges are desired when designing ductile shear walls. Although Wall HCBW4 had a lower shear strength than the reference walls, the concentrated crack pattern might be preferable for repairing purposes because a smaller zone of the wall would require restoration or retrofit.
On the other hand, removing the shear reinforcement also modified the crack pattern, as can be noticed in Figure 10f. Wall HCBW5 showed a more delimited diagonal crack band than the reference walls, which is a sign of the capability of horizontal steel elements to force crack spreading throughout the panel. Providing shear reinforcement also increases the ratio of the total area of the panel that is effectively employed to resist lateral forces, and, therefore, the efficiency of the construction system. In this case, the presence of vertical rebars and grouted cells did not have a remarkable effect on the crack pattern since the trajectory of cracks was not altered by those elements, as already observed in Walls HCBW1-A and HCBW1-B.
The wall with edge elements (HCBW6, Figure 10g) concentrated the diagonal cracking in the interior of the panel, a zone that presented a similar crack pattern as the reference walls. The toes of Wall HCBW6 were not crushed or extensively cracked because of the higher cross-section at the edges. In fact, only horizontal flexural cracks were noticed in the transversal elements, which were needed by vertical reinforcement to work.
The walls with a reduced amount of vertical and horizontal reinforcement exhibited a higher capacity of energy dissipation in general, as appreciated in Figure 13c,d, respectively. In this figure, a similar equivalent viscous damping can be observed for all walls at smaller drift values, but Walls HCBW4 and HCBW5 showed a rapid increment in the equivalent viscous damping when drift values increased. Furthermore, the wall without horizontal reinforcement (HCBW5) exhibited a sudden increment on the equivalent viscous damping ratio at drifts between 0.02% and 0.05%, which can be explained by the development of several shear cracks at the beginning of the test.
Contrary to the expected, the horizontally unreinforced wall exhibited the highest ductility values. Nonetheless, this situation is a consequence of the lower yield deformation, which is associated with the cracks reported at low deformations at the beginning of the test.
Una de las principales reglas que están establecidas para nuestros distribuidores es: No anunciar el programa en sitios web que no sean de tu administración como: MercadoLibre, eBay, etc., por lo que si realizaste la compra por un medio distinto a nuestros medios de contacto, te recomendamos verificar estos detalles para que puedas verificar los datos de la licencia.
In 1974 J. Murphy and Sons was targeted in a crackdown against the widespread tax evasion practised in construction, and eighteen employees, not including Murphy, were charged. Further controversy arose in February 1975 when his managing director was fined for bribing a gas-board official. Once the tax fraud case opened in January 1976, the prosecution maintained that, to avoid deducting income tax at source, the J. Murphy group had disguised employees as registered sub-contractors through a network of fabricated companies, and had also deducted 5 per cent from certain unwitting workers for its own benefit.
Nota: Si adquieres eleventa MonoCaja, y posteriormente requieres migrar a eleventa MultiCaja, puedes pagar únicamente la diferencia. Para acceder a este beneficio toma en cuenta que tu licencia debe contar aun con actualizaciones.
Si realizaste una transferencia es necesario reportarlo por medio de nuestra página de Compras, si tu compra fue con tarjeta de crédito o débito no necesitas realizar el reporte, en breve recibirás un correo electrónico confirmando el pago y las instrucciones para enviarte tu licencia.
eebf2c3492
Crack Licencia Elevental
Download https://t.co/XEJcsPNj8w
Regarding axial load, this variable has a positive effect on the shear strength [14,19,21,25], although higher axial loads are associated with more brittle behaviors and lower deformation capacities [18,25]. In addition, Ramírez et al. [21] indicated that the energy dissipation capacity increases with the axial load. Differently, the effect of axial loads on the crack patterns is not clear since Oan [19] observed variations in the crack-widths and distribution, whereas Meli et al. [17] and Ramírez et al. [21] only observed reductions on the crack-widths.
The effect of the horizontal reinforcement ratio has been the most studied design parameter. In general, it has been reported that the presence of BJR is beneficial for the in-plane behavior of PG-RM shear walls because it provides post-cracking integrity [22,26], as well as capability of energy dissipation and ductility [14,24]. Tomaževič and Lutman [26] indicated that horizontal reinforcement acts only when the panel is diagonally cracked and that its effectiveness depends on the capacity of materials to provided appropriated local anchoring to reinforcement. The authors also pointed out that an increment in the horizontal reinforcement ratio from 0.14% to 0.50% in slender walls (height-to-length ratio of 2.30) shifted the failure mode from shear to flexural. On the other hand, the effect of the horizontal reinforcement on the shear strength is still a subject of research because some authors have observed that shear strength increments with a higher horizontal reinforcement ratio [14,16,21], while others have stated that there is no relationship between them [19,27]. In this aspect, the main function of evenly distributed reinforcement (BJR) is to provide connectivity among cracked zones that usually concentrate in unreinforced sectors of panels [17,19] and ungrouted zones nearby grouted cores [19].
Afterward, progressive degradation of the lateral stiffness can be identified in all walls, where hysteresis cycles became wider as the deformation incremented. In this stage, the first major diagonal crack was identified on the specimens, associated with deformations that ranged from 1.25 to 6.58 mm. These values represented a fraction between 12.4% and 56.3% of the deformation of the maximum load of the corresponding load direction. However, it is important to remark that the major crack could only be observed once it achieved a considerable width. Therefore, this observation does not strictly correspond to the end of the elastic behavior but sets an upper bound and provides information when a certain degree of damage has been reached.
It can be noticed that the highest cracking resistance in each specimen was not always observed in the push loading direction, unlike the maximum resistance. Moreover, the lowest cracking deformation and cracking resistance of each specimen were not always in the same loading direction in all specimens. Therefore, the loading directions of smaller cracking deformation, maximum cracking resistance, and maximum shear strength are not correlated. Besides, it does not seem that the identification of the first major diagonal crack in one loading direction triggers the diagonal cracking in the opposite loading direction because of the ratios between maximum and minimum cracking deformations (δ1crmax/δ1crmin) ranged from 104.3% to 200.6%.
Figure 7d shows the effect of the horizontal reinforcement ratio, where Wall HCBW5 achieved a lower lateral resistance at a lower deformation than the reference walls. Moreover, Wall HCBW5 exhibited a sudden drop in its post-peak lateral resistance. This situation confirms the findings regarding the ability of ladder type-reinforcement to increase the shear strength [14,16,21] and to provide integrity to the compound once cracks have appeared [22,26].
Strain gauge schemes and measurements for the wall HCBW1-A: (a) location of strain gauges, (b) crack pattern at the test end, (c) envelope curve in the push load direction; Envelope curves of the strain gauges in the push load direction at: (d) HR2, (e) HR3, (f) HR4, (g) HR5, (h) HR6, (i) HR7, (j) HR8, and (k) HR9.
Afterward and before reaching the deformation at maximum lateral force, other SGs also exceeded the yield strain of the shear reinforcement (εy,HR), in particular SGs 7, 6, 10, 11, 17, 2, 8, 13, 1, 12, 16, 19, 20, 22, and 24 (sorted according the plasticization sequence). These SGs were not all on the compressed diagonal of the wall, but mainly in the zone below that diagonal, at the locations where cracks were mapped when maximum lateral force was recorded (Figure 8e). Finally, once the wall was losing resistance, strains continued growing in most SGs, especially in those located in the inferior half of the panel. This behavior was mainly due to the extensive damage at both wall toes, which was generated by the compression struts that acted in both load directions, as illustrated in Figure 9b.
On the other hand, Wall HCBW3 exhibited a crack pattern (Figure 10d) very similar to the base Wall HCBW1-A, although it achieved a lateral displacement comparable with Wall HCBW1-B. This situation implies that increasing the width of the blocks decreases the extension of cracks, which provides integrity to the wall in the post-peak regime, as previously discussed.
Figure 10e shows that reducing the vertical reinforcement ratio (ρv) generated a drastic variation on the crack pattern, where damage concentrated in the first four block courses of Wall HCBW4. The lower flexural stiffness allowed a higher rotation of the panel, with a crack pattern that recalls a plastic hinge. Note that plastic hinges are desired when designing ductile shear walls. Although Wall HCBW4 had a lower shear strength than the reference walls, the concentrated crack pattern might be preferable for repairing purposes because a smaller zone of the wall would require restoration or retrofit.
On the other hand, removing the shear reinforcement also modified the crack pattern, as can be noticed in Figure 10f. Wall HCBW5 showed a more delimited diagonal crack band than the reference walls, which is a sign of the capability of horizontal steel elements to force crack spreading throughout the panel. Providing shear reinforcement also increases the ratio of the total area of the panel that is effectively employed to resist lateral forces, and, therefore, the efficiency of the construction system. In this case, the presence of vertical rebars and grouted cells did not have a remarkable effect on the crack pattern since the trajectory of cracks was not altered by those elements, as already observed in Walls HCBW1-A and HCBW1-B.
The wall with edge elements (HCBW6, Figure 10g) concentrated the diagonal cracking in the interior of the panel, a zone that presented a similar crack pattern as the reference walls. The toes of Wall HCBW6 were not crushed or extensively cracked because of the higher cross-section at the edges. In fact, only horizontal flexural cracks were noticed in the transversal elements, which were needed by vertical reinforcement to work.
The walls with a reduced amount of vertical and horizontal reinforcement exhibited a higher capacity of energy dissipation in general, as appreciated in Figure 13c,d, respectively. In this figure, a similar equivalent viscous damping can be observed for all walls at smaller drift values, but Walls HCBW4 and HCBW5 showed a rapid increment in the equivalent viscous damping when drift values increased. Furthermore, the wall without horizontal reinforcement (HCBW5) exhibited a sudden increment on the equivalent viscous damping ratio at drifts between 0.02% and 0.05%, which can be explained by the development of several shear cracks at the beginning of the test.
Contrary to the expected, the horizontally unreinforced wall exhibited the highest ductility values. Nonetheless, this situation is a consequence of the lower yield deformation, which is associated with the cracks reported at low deformations at the beginning of the test.
Una de las principales reglas que están establecidas para nuestros distribuidores es: No anunciar el programa en sitios web que no sean de tu administración como: MercadoLibre, eBay, etc., por lo que si realizaste la compra por un medio distinto a nuestros medios de contacto, te recomendamos verificar estos detalles para que puedas verificar los datos de la licencia.
In 1974 J. Murphy and Sons was targeted in a crackdown against the widespread tax evasion practised in construction, and eighteen employees, not including Murphy, were charged. Further controversy arose in February 1975 when his managing director was fined for bribing a gas-board official. Once the tax fraud case opened in January 1976, the prosecution maintained that, to avoid deducting income tax at source, the J. Murphy group had disguised employees as registered sub-contractors through a network of fabricated companies, and had also deducted 5 per cent from certain unwitting workers for its own benefit.
Nota: Si adquieres eleventa MonoCaja, y posteriormente requieres migrar a eleventa MultiCaja, puedes pagar únicamente la diferencia. Para acceder a este beneficio toma en cuenta que tu licencia debe contar aun con actualizaciones.
Si realizaste una transferencia es necesario reportarlo por medio de nuestra página de Compras, si tu compra fue con tarjeta de crédito o débito no necesitas realizar el reporte, en breve recibirás un correo electrónico confirmando el pago y las instrucciones para enviarte tu licencia.
eebf2c3492
0 new messages