지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학위논문
- 저자정보
- 지도교수
- 홍순일
- 발행연도
- 2013
- 저작권
- 강원대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다.
이용수1
이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (3)
- 이 논문의 후속연구가 궁금하신가요?
- 연관 학술논문 또는 학술발표를 통해 보다 발전된 연구결과를 확인하실 수 있습니다.
- 이 논문의 연구 히스토리 확인하기
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In this study, wooden retaining wall was made with Domestic pitch pine was evaluated for the strength properties.
TypeⅠ-A was connected H/W #12 X 160(mm) drill screw with round posts of diameter 120mm and length 1000mm in strength performance evaluation of wooden retaining wall using round posts. TypeⅠ-B was made like TypeⅠ-A. But, TypeⅠ-B was connected with H/W #16 X 1000(mm) stud bolt and drill screw. TypeⅡ-A was made with length 2000mm of stretcher and length 1000mm of header, connected with drill screw. TypeⅡ-B was made same as TypeⅡ-A. Except, connector which was used like TypeⅠ-B.
One of each specimens was taken impact test and those were compared with the other specimen which was not taken for strength performance by horizontal loading test.
As a result, the specimen with only drill screw hardly show difference in strength but the specimen with stud bolt and drill screw show 66% lower strength. That is because of breaking of member that was resulted from excessive using of connector, which makes strength performance of wooden retaining wall decline. There’s a big gap between large end diameter and top diameter of pitch pine’s log so when it is made to round post, it shows 30% of Ave. yield rate, and it is very low number. Thus, the price increase rate of row materials goes up, so it is put 30% higher price than concrete structure.
Therefore, the strength properties of wooden model retaining wall made of pitch pine(Pinus rigida Miller) was evaluated. Three different types of wooden model retaining wall were made of the 11cm square timber treated with CUAZ-2(Copper Azole). The retaining wall was made into the 4 layers of stretcher and the 3 layers of header, of which the size was 860mm high, 2000mm long and 960mm wide. TypeⅠ was control and in TypeⅡ 200mm header and 930mm header were arranged alternately to decrease wood usage. TypeⅢ was similar to TypeⅡ, except that the connection between stretcher was reinforced with the wooden armature. In each type, the strength properties of retaining wall were investigated by horizontal loading test and the deformation of structure by image processing(AICON 3D DPA-PRO system).
In horizontal loading test of TypeⅠ, TypeⅡ and TypeⅢ was 63.17kN/m, 57.80kN/m and 60.97kN/m, respectively. The deformation of the top layer in TypeⅡ was 1.5 times larger than in TypeⅠ and TypeⅢ.
Consequently, the economic efficiency and strength performance were better in TypeⅢ than in TypeⅠ and TypeⅡ.
A connection was made between a single stretcher and 2 headers with 2 drill screws(Type CA), and another one between 2 stretchers and 2 headers with 4 drill screws(Type CB)to use as specimens of strength performance evaluation of wooden retaining wall using square timber. Nevertheless, crack and break are created in the wood by drill screw when Type CB is constructed, and construction time also becomes longer. To strengthen Type CB, Type CC was the stretchers that are connected with 2 drill screws by half lap joint at end-distance 5D to reinforce Type CB, Type CD the stretchers that are connected by half lap joint at end-distance 10D, and Type CE with 3 drill screw at end-distance 10D. Compressive shear strength of Type CC, the supplementation of Type CB, was decreased by 30%, compared with that of Type CB. Those of Type CB and Type CD that used longer end-distance than Type CC were about the same, and that of Type CE connected with drill screw nails was 1.28-times stronger than that of Type CD. Connection of the retaining wall using existing square timber has a problem between long and short stretchers and 2 headers. So it was investigated in the experiment to replace it. Therefore, if Type CB is replaced with Type CE in constructing the retaining wall, the crack and the rupture of timber caused by drill screw as well as construction period can be reduced, and also it can be expected to increase their own strength.
Pitch pine(Pinus rigida Miller) retaining walls using steel bar, of which the constructability and strength performance are good at the construction site, were manufactured and their strength properties were evaluated. The wooden retaining wall using steel bar was piled into four stories stretcher and three stories header, which is 770mm high, 2890mm length and 782mm width. Retaining wall was made by inserting stretchers into steel bar after making 18mm diameter of holes at top and bottom stretcher, and then stacking other stretchers and headers which have a slit of 66mm depth and 18mm width. The strength properties of retaining walls were investigated by horizontal loading test, and the deformation of structure by image processing (AlCON 3D DPA-PRO system). Joint (Type CA) made with a single long stretcher and two headers, and joint (Type CB) made with two short stretchers connected with half lap joint and two headers were in the retaining wall using steel bar. The compressive shear strength of joint was tested. Three replicates were used in each test. In horizontal loading test the strength was 1.6 times stronger in wooden retaining wall using steel bar than in wooden retaining wall using square timber. The timber and joints were not fractured in the test. When testing compressive shear strength, the maximum load of type CA and Type CB was 130.13kN and 130.6kN, respectively. Construct ability and strength were better in the wooden retaining wall using steel bar than in wooden retaining wall using square timber.
The installed wooden retaining wall needs to be maintained regularly and there’s a measurement method used ultrasonic wave to detect the crack which is made in member. Therefore, it was sought that the most proper method to find vertical crack occurred in wooden retaining wall, and the vertical crack depth was anticipated.
According to the result of this experiment, the most accurate way to find vertical crack is that placing transmitter and receiver side by side on cracked member, and then measuring the gap between them as gradually make it longer. In addition, according to testing the prediction for vertical crack depth, it can be predicted when the distance between transducers is 80mm, the vertical crack depth is up to 60mm.
TypeⅠ-A was connected H/W #12 X 160(mm) drill screw with round posts of diameter 120mm and length 1000mm in strength performance evaluation of wooden retaining wall using round posts. TypeⅠ-B was made like TypeⅠ-A. But, TypeⅠ-B was connected with H/W #16 X 1000(mm) stud bolt and drill screw. TypeⅡ-A was made with length 2000mm of stretcher and length 1000mm of header, connected with drill screw. TypeⅡ-B was made same as TypeⅡ-A. Except, connector which was used like TypeⅠ-B.
One of each specimens was taken impact test and those were compared with the other specimen which was not taken for strength performance by horizontal loading test.
As a result, the specimen with only drill screw hardly show difference in strength but the specimen with stud bolt and drill screw show 66% lower strength. That is because of breaking of member that was resulted from excessive using of connector, which makes strength performance of wooden retaining wall decline. There’s a big gap between large end diameter and top diameter of pitch pine’s log so when it is made to round post, it shows 30% of Ave. yield rate, and it is very low number. Thus, the price increase rate of row materials goes up, so it is put 30% higher price than concrete structure.
Therefore, the strength properties of wooden model retaining wall made of pitch pine(Pinus rigida Miller) was evaluated. Three different types of wooden model retaining wall were made of the 11cm square timber treated with CUAZ-2(Copper Azole). The retaining wall was made into the 4 layers of stretcher and the 3 layers of header, of which the size was 860mm high, 2000mm long and 960mm wide. TypeⅠ was control and in TypeⅡ 200mm header and 930mm header were arranged alternately to decrease wood usage. TypeⅢ was similar to TypeⅡ, except that the connection between stretcher was reinforced with the wooden armature. In each type, the strength properties of retaining wall were investigated by horizontal loading test and the deformation of structure by image processing(AICON 3D DPA-PRO system).
In horizontal loading test of TypeⅠ, TypeⅡ and TypeⅢ was 63.17kN/m, 57.80kN/m and 60.97kN/m, respectively. The deformation of the top layer in TypeⅡ was 1.5 times larger than in TypeⅠ and TypeⅢ.
Consequently, the economic efficiency and strength performance were better in TypeⅢ than in TypeⅠ and TypeⅡ.
A connection was made between a single stretcher and 2 headers with 2 drill screws(Type CA), and another one between 2 stretchers and 2 headers with 4 drill screws(Type CB)to use as specimens of strength performance evaluation of wooden retaining wall using square timber. Nevertheless, crack and break are created in the wood by drill screw when Type CB is constructed, and construction time also becomes longer. To strengthen Type CB, Type CC was the stretchers that are connected with 2 drill screws by half lap joint at end-distance 5D to reinforce Type CB, Type CD the stretchers that are connected by half lap joint at end-distance 10D, and Type CE with 3 drill screw at end-distance 10D. Compressive shear strength of Type CC, the supplementation of Type CB, was decreased by 30%, compared with that of Type CB. Those of Type CB and Type CD that used longer end-distance than Type CC were about the same, and that of Type CE connected with drill screw nails was 1.28-times stronger than that of Type CD. Connection of the retaining wall using existing square timber has a problem between long and short stretchers and 2 headers. So it was investigated in the experiment to replace it. Therefore, if Type CB is replaced with Type CE in constructing the retaining wall, the crack and the rupture of timber caused by drill screw as well as construction period can be reduced, and also it can be expected to increase their own strength.
Pitch pine(Pinus rigida Miller) retaining walls using steel bar, of which the constructability and strength performance are good at the construction site, were manufactured and their strength properties were evaluated. The wooden retaining wall using steel bar was piled into four stories stretcher and three stories header, which is 770mm high, 2890mm length and 782mm width. Retaining wall was made by inserting stretchers into steel bar after making 18mm diameter of holes at top and bottom stretcher, and then stacking other stretchers and headers which have a slit of 66mm depth and 18mm width. The strength properties of retaining walls were investigated by horizontal loading test, and the deformation of structure by image processing (AlCON 3D DPA-PRO system). Joint (Type CA) made with a single long stretcher and two headers, and joint (Type CB) made with two short stretchers connected with half lap joint and two headers were in the retaining wall using steel bar. The compressive shear strength of joint was tested. Three replicates were used in each test. In horizontal loading test the strength was 1.6 times stronger in wooden retaining wall using steel bar than in wooden retaining wall using square timber. The timber and joints were not fractured in the test. When testing compressive shear strength, the maximum load of type CA and Type CB was 130.13kN and 130.6kN, respectively. Construct ability and strength were better in the wooden retaining wall using steel bar than in wooden retaining wall using square timber.
The installed wooden retaining wall needs to be maintained regularly and there’s a measurement method used ultrasonic wave to detect the crack which is made in member. Therefore, it was sought that the most proper method to find vertical crack occurred in wooden retaining wall, and the vertical crack depth was anticipated.
According to the result of this experiment, the most accurate way to find vertical crack is that placing transmitter and receiver side by side on cracked member, and then measuring the gap between them as gradually make it longer. In addition, according to testing the prediction for vertical crack depth, it can be predicted when the distance between transducers is 80mm, the vertical crack depth is up to 60mm.
목차
Ⅰ. 서 론·································································································1Ⅱ. 연구사·······························································································3Ⅲ. 원주목을 이용한 옹벽의 내력 성능 평가······················································53. 1. 재료 및 실험방법··············································································53. 1. 1. 공시재료····················································································53. 1. 2. 실험방법····················································································63. 1. 2. 1. 원주목 옹벽의 제작··································································63. 1. 2. 2. 원주목 옹벽의 충격시험····························································103. 1. 2. 3. 원주목 옹벽의 수평 재하 시험····················································113. 1. 2. 4. ACION 3D DPA-PRO SYSTEM을 3차원 이용한 변형 측정················123. 2. 결과 및 고찰··················································································143. 2. 1. 원주목 옹벽의 충격시험································································143. 2. 2. 원주목 옹벽의 수평 재하 시험························································183. 2. 3. 원주목 옹벽의 파괴모드································································263. 3. 결론····························································································29Ⅳ. 정각재를 이용한 옹벽의 내력 성능 평가····················································304. 1. 재료 및 실험방법············································································304. 1. 1. 공시재료··················································································304. 1. 2. 실험방법··················································································314. 1. 2. 1. 정각재 옹벽의 제작·································································314. 1. 2. 2. ACION 3D DPA-PRO SYSTEM을 이용한 3차원 변형 측정················344. 1. 2. 3. 정각재 옹벽의 수평 재하 시험····················································354. 1. 2. 4. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 전단 내력 시험···········································374. 1. 2. 4. 1. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 압축 형 전단 내력 시험체 제작···················384. 1. 2. 4. 2. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 압축 형 전단 내력 시험 방법·····················434. 1. 2. 4. 3. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 휨 형 전단 내력 시험체 제작·····················444. 1. 2. 4. 4. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 휨 형 전단 내력 시험 방법························464. 1. 2. 5. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 컴퓨터 단층 촬영········································464. 2. 결과 및 고찰··················································································474. 2. 1. 정각재 옹벽의 수평 재하 시험························································474. 2. 2. ACION 3D DPA-PRO SYSTEM을 이용한 3차원 변형 측정····················504. 2. 3. 정각재 옹벽의 파괴모드································································544. 2. 4. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 전단 내력 시험···············································564. 2. 4. 1. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 압축 형 전단 내력 시험·······························564. 2. 4. 2. 압축 형 전단 내력 시험체의 파괴모드·········································604. 2. 4. 3. 정각재 옹벽 접합부의 휨 형 전단 내력 시험·································644. 2. 4. 4. 휨 형 전단 내력 시험체의 파괴모드 ··········································663. 결론···································································································69Ⅴ. 스틸바(Steel Bar)를 이용한 정각재 옹벽의 내력 성능 평가····························705. 1. 재료 및 실험방법············································································705. 1. 1. 공시재료··················································································705. 1. 2. 실험방법··················································································735. 1. 2. 1. 스틸바 옹벽 제작···································································735. 1. 2. 2. 스틸바 옹벽 유닛형 제작··························································765. 1. 2. 3. AICON 3D DPA-PRO SYSTEM을 이용한 3차원 변형 측정················785. 1. 2. 4. 스틸바 옹벽의 수평 재하 시험····················································795. 1. 2. 5. 스틸바 옹벽 접합부의 전단 내력 시험···········································825. 1. 2. 5. 1. 스틸바 옹벽 접합부의 압축 형 전단 내력 시험체 제작···················835. 1. 2. 5. 2. 스틸바 옹벽 접합부의 압축 형 전단 내력 시험 방법·····················845. 2. 결과 및 고찰··················································································855. 2. 1. 스틸바 옹벽의 수평 재하 시험························································855. 2. 1. 1. AICON 3D DPA-PRO SYSTEM을 이용한 3차원 변형 측정················885. 2. 1. 2. 스틸바 옹벽의 파괴모드····························································915. 2. 2. 스틸바 옹벽 접합부의 전단내력 시험················································965. 2. 2. 1. 스틸바 옹벽 접합부의 압축 형 전단내력 시험·································965. 2. 2. 2. 스틸바 옹벽 접합부의 파괴모드··················································985. 2. 3. 가상단면에 대한 스틸바 옹벽의 안정계산··········································1005. 2. 3. 1. 설계조건············································································1005. 2. 3. 2. 옹벽의 단위체적 중량 계산······················································1015. 2. 3. 3. 구조계산············································································1025. 2. 3. 4. 안정성 검토········································································1035. 3. 결론···························································································104Ⅵ. 초음파를 이용한 목재옹벽의 할렬 탐지····················································1056. 1. 재료 및 실험방법···········································································1056. 1. 1. 공시재료·················································································1056. 1. 2. 실험방법·················································································1056. 1. 2. 1. 초음파 측정 방법에 따른 할렬 탐지············································1066. 1. 2. 1. 1. 송신(Tx)단자를 할렬의 상(上)단면에 위치한 측정 방법················1076. 1. 2. 1. 2. 송신(Tx)단자를 할렬의 측(側)단면에 위치한 측정 방법················1086. 1. 2. 1. 3. 송신(Tx)단자를 할렬의 하(下)단면에 위치한 측정 방법················1096. 1. 2. 1. 4. 송신(Tx)단자를 횡(橫)단면에 위치한 측정 방법························1106. 1. 2. 2. 수직 할렬의 깊이 예측····························································1116. 2. 결과 및 고찰················································································1146. 2. 1. 초음파 측정 방법에 따른 할렬 탐지················································1146. 2. 1. 1. 송신(Tx)단자의 위치가 할렬의 상(上)단면 일 때의 초음파 통과 시간····1146. 2. 1. 2. 송신(Tx)단자의 위치가 할렬의 측(側)단면 일 때의 초음파 통과 시간····1166. 2. 1. 3. 송신(Tx)단자의 위치가 할렬의 하(下)단면 일 때의 초음파 통과 시간····1186. 2. 1. 4. 송신(Tx)단자의 위치가 횡(橫)단면 일 때의 초음파 통과 시간·············1206. 2. 2. 수직 할렬의 깊이 예측································································1226. 3. 결론···························································································125Ⅶ. 결론································································································126Ⅷ. 참고문헌···························································································129
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0