• Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society
• /
• v.20 no.5
• /
• pp.145-159
• /
• 2004

The conventional method for assessment of liquefaction potential proposed by Seed and Idriss has been widely used in most countries because of simplicity of tests. Even though various data such as stress, strain, stress path, and excess pore water pressure can be obtained from the dynamic test, especially, two simple experimental data such as the maximum deviatoric stress and the number of cycles at liquefaction have been used in the conventional assessment. In this study, a new detailed assessment for liquefaction potential to reflect both characteristics of real earthquake motion and dynamic soil resistance is proposed and verified. In the assessment, the safety factor of the liquefaction potential at a given depth of a site can be obtained by the ratio of a resistible cumulative plastic shear strain determined through the performance of the conventional cyclic test and a driving cumulative plastic shear strain calculated from the shear strain time history through the ground response analysis. The last point to cumulate the driving plastic shear strain to initiate soil liquefaction is important for this assessment. From the result of cyclic triaxial test using real earthquake motions, it was concluded that liquefaction under the impact-type earthquake loads would initiate as soon as a peak loading signal was reached. The driving cumulative plastic shear strain, therefore, can be determined by adding all plastic shear strains obtained from the ground response analysis up to the peak point. Through the verification of the proposed assessment, it can be concluded that the proposed assessment for liquefaction potential can be a progressive method to reflect both characteristics of the unique soil resistance and earthquake parameters such as peak earthquake signal, significant duration time, earthquake loading type, and magnitude.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.4
• /
• pp.396-408
• /
• 2008

Statement of problem: Within the elastic limit of the screw, the greater the preload, the tighter and more secure the screw joint. However, additional tensile forces can incur plastic deformation of the abutment screw when functional loads are superimposed on preload stresses, and they can elicit the loosening or fracture of the abutment screw. Therefore, it is necessary to find the optimum preload that will maximize fatigue life and simultaneously offer a reasonable degree of protection against loosening. Another critical factor in addition to the applied torque which can affect the amount of preload is the joint connection type between implant and abutment. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of tightening torque on the implant-abutment screw joint stability. Material and methods: Respectively, three different amount of tightening torque (20, 30, and 40 Ncm) were applied to implant systems with three different joint connections, one external butt joint and two internal cones. The initial removal torque value and the postload (cyclic loading up to 100,000 cycles) removal torque value of the abutment screw were measured with digital torque gauge. Then rate of the initial and the postload removal torque loss were calculated for the comparison of the effect of tightening torques and joint connection types between implant and abutment on the joint stability. Results and conclusion: 1. Increase in tightening torque value resulted in significant increase in initial and postload removal torque value in all implant systems (P < .05). 2. Initial removal torque loss rates in SS II system were not significantly different when three different tightening torque values were applied (P > .05), however GS II and US II systems exhibited significantly lower loss rates with 40 Ncm torque value than with 20 Ncm (P < .05). 3. In all implant systems, postload removal torque loss rates were lowest when the torque value of 30 Ncm was applied (P < .05). 4. Postload removal torque loss rates tended to increase in order of SS II, GS II and US II system. 5. There was no correlation between initial removal torque value and postload removal torque loss rate (P > .05).

• Journal of the Korea institute for structural maintenance and inspection
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.73-80
• /
• 2022

In this study, details of NRC beam-column connections were developed in which beam and columns pre-assembled in factories using steel angles were bolted on site. The developed joint details are NRC-J type and NRC-JD type. NRC-J type is a method of tensile joining with TS bolts to the side and lower surfaces of the side plate of the NRC column and the end plate of the NRC beam. NRC-JD type has a rigid joint with high-strength bolts between the NRC beam and the side of the NRC column for shear, and with lap splices of reinforcing bar penetrating the joint and the beam main reinforcement for bending. For the seismic performance evaluation of the joint, three specimens were tested: an NRC-J specimen and NRC-JD specimen with NRC beam-column joint details, and an RC-J specimen with RC beam-column joint detail. As a result of the repeated lateral load test, the final failure mode of all specimens was the bending fracture of the beam at the beam-column interface. Compared to the RC-J specimen, the maximum strength of the specimen by the positive force was 10.1% and 29.6% higher in the NRC-J specimen and the NRC-JD specimen, respectively. Both NRC joint details were evaluated to secure ductility of 0.03 rad or more, the minimum total inter-story displacement angle required for the composite intermediate moment frame according to the KDS standard (KDS 41 31 00). At the slope by relative storey displacemet of 5.7%, the NRC-J specimen and the NRC-JD specimen had about 34.8% and 61.1% greater cumulative energy dissipation capacity than the RC specimen. The experimental strength of the NRC beam-column connection was evaluated to be 30% to 53% greater than the theoretical strength according to the KDS standard formula, and the standard formula evaluated the joint performance as a safety side.