INTERACTION OF REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAMECRACKED SHEAR WALL SYSTEMS

SUBJECTED TO EARTHQUAKE LOADINGS

FRITZ ENGINE:ERING
U\ElORATORY LIBRARY

BY

GILBERTO AREIZA
CELAL

FRITZ ENGINEERING LABORATORY REPORT

N.

KOSTEM

No. 433.4

INTERACTION OF REINFORCED. CONCRETE FRAMECRACKED SHEAR WALL SYSTEMS
SUBJECTED TO EARTHQUAKE LOADINGS

by

Gilberte Areiza

Celal N. Kostem

Fritz Engineering Laboratory
Department of Civil Engineering
Lehigh University
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
July 1979
Fritz Engineering Laboratory Report No. 433.4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT"

1

1.

INTRODUCTION

3

2.

FRAME-SHEAR WALL INTERACTION

5

3.

2.1

Analysis and Design of Frame-Shear Wall Systems

5

2.2

The Scope of

th~"Reported Res~arch

6

ANALYSIS OF THE FRAME-SHEAR WALL SYSTEMS

9

3.1

Description of the Frames

9

3.2

Frame-Shear Wall Configurations

9

3.3

Analysis

10

·3.4" . Frame-Cracked-·She"ar Wall Systems

4.

13

3.4.1

Damage Mechanism

14

3.4.2

Structural Idealization-and Soft Story
Concept

16

3.4.3

Assumed" Damage Mechanism

17

3.5

Mechanical_Properties

18

3.6

Analytical Modeling

19 '

3.6.1

Modeling Assumptions

19

3.6.2

M9deling of Cracked Walls

20

3.6.3

Piecewise Linearization

21 .

23

-RESULTS

4.1

General Comments

23

4.2

Deflection" Profiles

24

4.3

Distribution of

4.4

Seismic

B~se

Shear·

Con~iderations

iv

26

28

5. v .5 5.2 Distribution of Base Shear 31 4.TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page 4.5.5.1 Deflection Profiles 30 4. Post-Cracked Behavior 30 4.APPROXIMATION OF FUNDAMENTAL PERIODS 96 OF VIBRATION ·AC~OWLEDGEMENTS 100 .3 Seismic Characteristics 32 34 ··CONCLUSIONS TABLES 36 FIGURES 49 REFERENCES 94 APPENDIX A .

SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATIONS 42 7 DISTRIBUTION OF BASE SHEAR FRAME 1 .SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATION 37 2 DISTRIBUTION OF BASE SHEAR FRAME 2 .SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATIONS 38 NATURAL PERIODS OF VIBRATION 39 4 NATURAL PERIODS OF VIBRATION 40 5 TOP DEFLECTION" INCREMENT FRAME 1 CONFIGURATIONS SHEAR WALL 41 6 TOP DEFLECTION INCREMENT FRAME 2 .IONS 10 11 BASE SHEAR INCREMENT FRAME 2 CONFIGURATIONS ~ SHEAR WALL NATURAL PERIOD OF VIBRATION INCREMENT FRAME-l - 46 47 -SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATIONS 12 NATURAL PERIOD OF VIBRATION INCREMENT FRAME 2 SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATIONS 48 Al FUNDAMENTAL PERIODS (IN SECONDS) BY VARIOUS ASSUMPTIONS 99 vi .CRACKED SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATIONS 44 BASE SHEAR INCREMENT FRAME 1 .LIST OF TABLES Table 1 DISTRIBUTION OF BASE SHEAR FRAME 1 .CRACKED SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATIONS 43 8 DISTRIBUTION OF BASE SHEAR FRAME 2 .SHEAR WALL 45 9 CONFIGURAT.

s.'rame i-Shear Wall. S. Length = 366 em 60 12 Deflection Profiles Frame i-Shear Wall D. S. 58 Deflection Profiles Frame l-Shear Wall B. 64 15 . W.Member Sizes 56 8 Frame-Shear Wall Configurations 57 9 Deflection Profiles Frame l-Shear Wall A. s. W.:W.Dimensions and Design Loads 55 7 Frame 2 . S.·Length = 244 em . s. . Length = 488 em 62 14 Deflection Profiles Frame 2-Shear Wall A. Length = 610 em 67 vii . 427 em 16 Deflection Profiles Frame 2-Shear Wall C. S. W. Length = 488 em ' 65 17 Deflection Profiles Frame 2-Shear Wall D.Member Sizes 54 6 Frame· 2 . C. W. W. w.·W. Le~gth = ~~9 em 66 18 Deflection Profiles Frame 2-Shear Wall E. Length = 366 em 63 Deflection Profiles Frame 2-Shear Wall B. w. S.LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Shear Wall Deformation 2 Rigid Frame 3 Frame-Shear Wall 52 Frame"l '-'Dimensions and Design Loads 53 5 Frame 1 .W. S. Length =.305 em 59 11 Deflection Profiles . Length = 427 em 13 Deflection Profi~es Frame I-Shear Wall E. Length' .· . 61 '4 10 50 Deforma~~on 51 s.

W. W. W. E. 22 Natural Periods of Vibration for Chosen Combinations of Frame 2 and Shear Walls 71 23 Shear Wall Panel Assumed Crack Pattern 72 24 Frame-Cracked Shear Wall Configurations 73 25 Deflection Profiles Frame 1 . B. E ~ O. Es = O. E = O.Cracked S. E.Cracked S.Combinations of Frame 1 and Shear Walls 70 . D.25E s c 79 31 Deflection Profiles Frame 2 . 21 Natural Periods of Vibration. W. 74 Es = O. oA.Cracked S.25E 80 32 Deflection Profiles Frame 2 .r· . D. 'E = O. 78 E·S = O. 83 s E s c" = O.Chosen .25E s c . C.Cracked S.Cracked S. C. 68 20 Percentages of Base Shear on Frame 2 for Chosen Dimensions of Shear Wall 69 .. W".25Ec 26 27 29 Deflection Profiles Frame 1 .25E c 75 Cracked S. W. A. 76 Deflection Profiles Frame 1 .Cracked S. E = O.25Ec 82 34 Deflection Profiles Frame 2 ..25E s c 81 33 Deflection Profiles Frame 2 . W. W.LIST OF FIGVRES (continued) Figure Page 0 19 Percentages of Base Shear on F·rame 1 fo. W. .25Ec 30 . E = O.Cracked S. W.Deflection Profiles Frame 1 ·E s = O.25E~ 'c viii - .25E s c 77 Deflection Profiles Frame 1 .Cracked S.Deflection Profiles Frame 2 ". Chosen Dimensions of Shear"Wall . B.Cracked S.for.

Cracked Walls 42 89 .Dimensions of Cracked Wall 86 Percentages of Base Shear on Frame 2 for Chosen Dimensions of Cracked Wall 87 38 39 Percentage Base Shear Incre~ent for Frame 1 . 2 .s .LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure 35 Percentage Top Deflectiq~. and.Increment for Frame 1 and Cracked Wall Combinations 84 36 Percentage Top Deflection Increment for Frame 2 and Cracked Wall Combinations 85 Percentages of Base Shear on Frame 1 for Chosen .of Vibration for Chosen 'Combinations of Frame 2 and Cracked Walls 91 43 Percentage Natural Period Increment for Frame 1 Cracked Wall Combinations 92 44 Percentage Natural Period Increment-for Frame. Combi~a­ 90 ··Natural Period.- 88 Cracked Wall Combinations 40 Percentage Base Shear Increment for Frame 2 Cracked Wall Combinations 41· Natural Periods of Vibration for Chosen tions of Frame 1. Cracked Wall Combinations 93 ix .

even though it provides many conveniences. The true interaction of the planar frame-shear wall has not been defined even for the static loadings. also provid~s ~ew chal~enges. the interaction is least understood. The complementary lateral stiffness properties of the frame and the shear wall result in substantial reductions in lateral deflection. The natural periods of vibration of the structural systems have been. in the ca~e of earthquake loadings. they are to be subjected to appreciable lateral loads such as high wind pressures.High-rise reinforced concrete frame structures require special structural arrangements. The reported research utilized two different frames stiffened with two different types of shear walls with each wall having five different dimensions. ~f. The combined frame-shear wall.~S~CT . One of the practical methods that· has been gaining greater popularity and acceptance is 'the use of the reinforced concrete shear wall through the height of the building in one or more bays. where the efficiency of the structural system is at its best. thereby resulting in the analysis of 20 structural systems. _The analysis is carried out by using finite element method. accurately computed and comparisons have been provided with the current design codes. 1 . and assuming that the struct~ral system will remain linear elastic in the course of the loading •. and especially earthquake lQadings..

could be increased 40% to 70%. due to a previous earthquake or primary shock of the earthquake under consideration. The structural and vibrational characteristics of the frame-shear wall system have been recomputed considering the damaged walls. The results have been presented in the form of deflection profiles. The research concluded that (1) for high-rise structural systems frame and shear wall should be designed to have complementary and compatible displacements. and (3) static equivalent lateral load in seismic design.The study has been extended to the structural systems where the shear walls have X-cracking. (2) in "reasonable" structural systems the frame carries 15% of the base shear. 2 . Tentative guidelines are provided for the preliminary dimensioning of the shear walls. due to the cracking. according to the UnifoTIffi Building Code. periods of vibration the total base shear developed. At~empts have been made to correlate the structural degradation in the shear wall. Special attention is paid to the behavior of the structural systems when subjected to lateral loadings. if they are to be combined with the' reinforced concrete frames. and the static and dynamic response of the structural system with and without the imposed damage. and the percentages of base shear taken by the frame and by the shear wall.

" i. They. which may range from economic factors.1. This can be referred to as "premium. heights. Several fac- tors account for this rapid development of reinforced construction. for increased. Depending upon the number of stories. to aesthetic requirements and architects' personal preferences. structural engineers usually have to use other configurations when dealing with tall concrete buildings. have been bui~t up to heights of about 60 stories (Ref~ 3).high-rise concrete ones. INTRODUCTION During the last three decades increased design and construction of high-rise reinforced concrete buildings are noted o The current trend indicates thatz in the future there will be an increase in the heights of this type of construction. tend to be unec~nomical beyond 10 or 15 stories due to the additional structural provisions required for lateral loads 9 In general. nevertheless. which depend entirely on the rigidity of the frame connection for their performance under vertical and lateral loads. like the lack of a strong steel industry in certain countries. 3 This has .e increase in cost due to lateral loads. which makes high-rise steel buildings very expensive as compared to . structural engineers increase the structural member sizes over those required for vertical loads. several structural sys- tems have been used o Frame structures. Since the most efficient multistory structure is that which pays the minimum premium in order to provide the necessary stiffness for lateral loads.

which enforce equal la'teral defo~ations at the floor levels. cantilever beam (Fig 0 1). 4 . If a deep vertical element or shear wall is subjected to lat- eral loading. When these two structural components are put together to form a different structural system. interaction forces.8) •. and Khan and Iyengar (Refs. are developed and an "interesting case of indeterminacy is created.led to the development of structural systems like shear wall. 3. whereas the deflection profile of a framed structure is analogous to that of a fixed-ended beam subjected to support settlement (Fig. shear wall. tube-in-tube and modular tube e f~ame­ A discus- sion of their advantages and optimization criteria is reported by Derecho. 2). The interaction between these two elements is such that the frame tends to reduce the lateral deflection of the shear wall at the top while" the wall supports the frame near the base (Fig e 3). framed tube. a. it will deform in a bending mode and its deflected shape is similar to that of.

This corresponds to a prohibitive prop- osition for the analysis of all structural systems. 2. the second stage is usually the time-consuming part~in the process. An accurate analysis of these structural systems'requires the coupled solution of elasticity formulation for the shear wall and matrix formulation for the frame.2. The second is the analysis the forces acting on each element are Thirdly the stresses are checked and the required modifications are made to comply with the. little is known about the interaction mechanism due to the complicated nature of the problem. designed and built in the past years. at this stage in order to reduce the computational effort. INTERACTION Analysis and Design of Frame-Sbe. Or conversely. and code requirements. 16)0 The first is the conceptual stage where the different criteria are established.1 FRAME-SHEAR WALL. detailed design computations and plans are completed. strength. many dubious assumptions·could be introduced. Due to the high degree of indeteuminacy of the system. of the structural systems: determined. except a few extremely simple configurations.ax Wall Systems Although frame-shear wall structures have been investigated. depending 5 . The design process of a frame-shear wall structure has four stages (Ref. Fina~ly.. the architectural and planning requirements are met and a tentative decision is made about the location and shape of the shear walls.

The special advantage of the method resides in its ability for automation of the.upon the desired simplicity. With the development of matrix structural ana~ysis techniques. 6). -the fini~e element method requires the formation and solution of a large numb'er 'of linear simul taneous algebraic equations. special approximate manual· methods were developed and used for many years. 14). In common with other procedures for numerical solutions in structural engi~eering problems. frame- shear wall structures can be realistically modeled for an analysis scheme of the required accuracy (Ref. 2. .2 The Scope of the Reported Research One of the many problems that a· structural engineer faces during the design process of a frame-shear wall system is to evaluate the effectiveness of a particular shear wall prior to a detailed 6 . equation formation process and in its ability to represent highly irregular and complex structures and loading conditi~nso Special situations in frame-shear wall systems. Using the finite element method. the increasing availability of computer programs for accurate analysis and the advent of the finite element method. The different approaches are summarized by Notch and Kostem (Ref. Prior to the development of computer- oriented techniques. the approximate manual methods of analysis of frame-shear wall systems have gradually become obsolete. like post-cracking behavior. can be easily handled by this method.

'which may result in savings in final design time and final design costs.>' Impositions of limitations will inevitably lead to restrictions on the applicability of the findings of the research 7 .computer analysis. an all inclusive investigation is not practical. Consequently. very little is known of these phenomena. Engineers designing for seismic loads are always concerned . The last part of this investigation is· devoted . a parametric investi- gation of limited scope and objectives can still be undertaken to identify the critical design parame~ers that govern the structural response. special attention must be given to the post-cracking behavior of the system in order to incorporate ductility requirements into the design process.to this aspect.'that the imposed seismic loads may be several times greater than the "allowabl. The reported research was under- taken to identify trends in the structural behavior of this type of system in order to develop tentative guidelines in dimensioning both frame and shear wall. about ductility and post-cracking behavior of the frame-shear wall systems (Refs. However. Even though the importance of the ductility of the shear wall and post-cracking behavior is recognized by all de~igners and analysts. and especially shear wall-frame interaction. This is due to the scarcity of qualitative and quantitative information on behavior of shear walls. Because of the presence of the many'variables that will affect the structural response of frame-shear wall systems. This is due to the fact. 16). 9.e static strength" of the shear wall (Ref.10).

The investigation is then extended to structural systems with cracked shear walls. several shear wall-frame configuration types are analyzed to provide information regarding lateral ·deflection profiles.of structural systems. 8 . Thus. The final results of the research will be in the form of tentative guidelines to assist designers in better understanding of the structural systems. Since design can be considered as a repetitive analysis. to. walls of various dimensions. the implementations of the findings number of "repetitive analyses. base shear distribution and vibrational characteristics. The frames are "attached" to shear Two different placements of the shear walls with respect to the frame are also investigated. rather than a set of curves." reporte~ herein can reduce the The above discussion is the fun- damental philosophy in the definition of the scope and the conduct of the reported research. tables or formulae that can enable the designer to by-pass the required analysis phase. provide. Two previously designed reinforced concrete frames are used in the parametric investigation.program.quantitative information on the effects of structural deterioration on the response.

3. 18). 7. This The dimensions and design loads for this frame are shown in Fig. 17)$ frame is referred to herein as Frame I. The resistance to lateral forces entirely depends upon the rigidity of the member connections. 6 and member sizes are shown in Fig.1 ANALYSIS OF THE FRAME-SHEAR~WALL SYSTEMS Description of the Frames One of the frames investigated is a'three-bay ten-story frame reported by Zagajeski and Bertero in their research program and described in "~omputer-Aided Optimum Seismic Design of Ductile Reinforced-Concrete Moment-Resisting Frames" (Ref.3. The second frame used in the investigation is a three-bay twenty-story reinforced concrete·f~ame taken from the report by Clough and Benuska.rames 1 and 2 are linked to five ·'different shear walls in two 9 . The building was originally designed to carry vertical loads plus the static lateral forces prescribed by the 1964 Edition of the Uniform Building Code using simple approximate analysis procedures. 3. 5.to herein as Frame The pertinent dimensions and working loads for this frame are shown in Fig.' 4 and member sizes are shown in Fig.2 Frame-Shear Wall Configurations F. "FHA Study of Seismic "Design Cri teria for HighRise Buildings II (Ref. 2). It is a rigid concrete frame designed to carry dead and live loads according to the American Concrete Institute Specifications (Ref. 2 0 The frame is' refer'red.

therefore.different types of configurations (Fig. 3. 8). In Type A frame-shear wall configuration the beams of the second bay are removed and the shear wall is placed in that position. it is not included in this inveBtigation. This results in a quasi-four-bay structural Since the common prac~ice in reinforced concrete frames is the moment connection. and Type A and Type B configurations using the· finite element computer program SAP IV (Ref. the concrete columns are removed and full moment-resisting beam-shear wall connection is assumed. 8). The columns supporting the second bay beams are also removed and full moment-resisti~g "beam-shear wall connection is considered.3 Analysis Each frame is analyzed for the origi~al frame. shear connection is not cons. 1). In Type B +frame-shear wall configuration the shear wall is placed adjacent to the last column line.Shear Wall ~imensions A 40 40 40 40 40 B C D E 10 x 244 x 305 x 366 x 427 ~ 488 (Centimeters) x 366 x x x x 427 488 549 610 . thereby resulting in twenty different structural systems.Shear Wall Dimensions (Centimeters) A 30' 30 30 30 30 B C D E Frame 2 . system (Fig.idered practical. Each frame-shear wall configuration is analyzed considering five choices of shear wall dimensions: Frame 1 .

In the analysis for wind load. analyzed for wind. dead'· and -live loads are :considered and com- bined using the recommendations of the 1977 Edition of the American Concrete Institute Standards '(Ref.. equivalent horizontal static forces acting at each floor level are computed. For-"wind load analysis. 20): v = ZIKCSW where: v= total lateral force to be resisted Z numerical coefficient depending upon the seismic zone I = occupancy importance factor K = horizontal force factor depending upon the type of 11 . Equivalent horizontal static forces are determined by using the recommendations of the 1976 Edition of the Uniform Building Code (Ref.Each frame and frame-shear wall confi-guration type are. and (2) dynamic forces throug~ the use of modal super- position technique are considered. dead -and live loads and earthquake excitation. wind and live loads In the analysis for earthquake loading (1) static equivalent type loads. The study included the following six load cases: Case 1: dead load only Case 2: wind load only Case 3: dead plus wind load ~~se factored dead and wind loads 4: Case 5: factored dead and live loads·· Case 6: factored dead. 18).

V. is distributed over the entire heigh t of' the s true ture according to: The concentrated force at the top. or T = 0.07(TV) ~ 0. is computed according t to: F t = O. V.10 N N ::::: total number of s-tories" above . F . when the lateral force resisting system consists of a ductile moment-resisting frame The total lateral force. base shear.structure W = total dead load of the structure C = numerical vibr~tio~ c = coefficient based on the natural period of of the structure.05 h j15' h = height of the building above base level in feet D ::::: d-imension of' .25 V The remaining portion . is distributed over the entire height of the structure including the top level according to: 12 . in feet.of the total.base level. 1 15fT' T = natural period of vibration in seconds T = 0. the s true ture in the direction parallel to the applied forces.

18): Case 1: static earthquake loads only Case 2: dead plus static earthquake loads Case 3: factored dead.F. 3.].loads Case 4: factored dead and static earthqua~e loads The actual dynamic response of the structures is detenmined by the modal superposition method employing the first five predominant modes. During an earthquake excitatian. J.1. = w. The extreme response of the structural system is computed by modal participation factors and square root of the sum of squares approa~h. l~vel to the ith level In the phase of analyses that included equivalent static earthquake loads..~ = weight of the ith level h. 'Ground motion is inputted by response spectrum. and subjecting the frames and frame-shear wall systems to El Centro Earthquake of May 1940. (v .4 Frame-Cracked Shear Wall Systems The last part of the investigation is devoted to the study of the post-cracked behavior of the frame-shear wall systems.n. four load cases were developed using ACI Standards (Ref. strong horizontal 13 .h.F ) " t :Ew. Natural periods of vibration are deter- mined 'as a by-product in the process. live and static earthquake . ]. = height above the base 1. ~ where: w.

14 . principal stresses being in the direction of the diagonals. these walls tend to. The last mode would be closer to the previously stated state of stress. may either be in essentially flexural or essentially shear mode. 3. or a combination thereof. 11). It is shown by Kostem and Green that masonry infill walls bounded by the reinforced concrete frame increase the lateral stiffness of the structure.4.accelerations result on the building masses producing horizontal loads. carry the larger percentage of the lateral loads. vertical dead and live loads act on each story of the structure. This con- tinues to be the case until shear wall developes local structural degradation and looses ·part of its lateral stiffness. height of the shear wall. each shear wall panel is sub- jected to vertical and lateral loads.e. and the panel is in bi-axial state of stress. Consequently. near the base of the shear wall due to the transfer of the base shear.1 Damage Mechanism Shear wall or any similar units that are built to perform like a diaphragm are the stiffest components of the overall frame-shear wall system. i. the wall may be subjected to a different mode of stress. However. Therefore. depending upon the overall structural· configuration. even though the masonry was not ttintended" to perform as a lateral stiffening unit (Ref. On the o'ther hand. The principal stress~s in th~ wall will be in the direction of the diagonals through most of the. It .

the support can be prevented. with sufficient attention paid to the lower levels of the wall. or at least retarded •. 9. However.At increased load levels the infill walls will exhibit the first sign of distress. the wall base may sustain the first damage. This is due to the large amount of base shear that is directly transmitted to the structure through the shear wall (Ref. if the wall is designed properly. and similarly from" lower right to upper left corner. Due to the structural imperfections. 9.10) 0' ·These' X-cracks or diagonal -cracks'~occur 'at" she"ar wall panels defined by the vertical boundaries of the shear wall and the consecutive beam axes o The cracks in the panel will extend from lower left to upper right corner. 16).randomly through the height of the shear wallo 15 . but . In the case of reinforced concrete frames with shear walls subjected to large seismic loadings. than the possible failure of the wall near . It can be concluded that in structural frame-shear wall systems the walls are more susceptible to damage than the rest of the structure (Refs. and especially due to the build up of seismic forces differently at different floors. " Field observations and analytical studies of the earthquake damage to the frame-shear wall structural systems have clearly indicated that the primary mode of damage sustained by the shear walls is the formation of 'cracks -(Refs. the-diagonal cracks do 'not necessarily "occur at each floor.10).

3. The recent approach by many res. becomes manageable. in the rep'orted research no a t temp t . depending upon the actual building configuration. its analysis. additional research 'by Kostem and Heckman have indicated that the state-of-·the-art in the isolation of the planar structural system from a three dimens ional s true ture has not progressed sufficiently (Refs..his process (Ref. 13) • This is primarily due to the contribution of the floor system to the lateral stiffness of the structure and the torsionaleffects that may exist in the actual structure.4. This assumes that the lower levels of the shear wall'will loose its inherent stiffness in the course of the earthquake. has been made to rela te the investigated planar structural systems to actual three dimensional ones. Since the accurate identification of the planar frame-shear wall system may require substantial engineering judgment and/or dubious assumptions. coupled with the gross reduction of the actual two dimensional ·frame-shear wall 16 . ~ has" . of the soft story concept. However.12. . This assumption.2 Structural Idealization and Soft Story Concept One of the major difficulties in analyzing the shear wall-frame system is to "extract" the planar unit out of a truly three dimensional structural configuration.. 5).been the use .e-archers. t. The research by Fintel and Gosh have provided "examples for. After isolation of the planar structural system. either in elastic regime or in inelastic regime.

a different but substantially less expensive 17 approa~h has been .4. pe~its the use of the time-history analysis of the structural system.combination into a much simpler one. than the results may contain large errors. reported research this approach ~as of nonlinearities. etc (Refs. i. however. i. but extremely expensive analysis scheme which will start with ~he intact structure and will progressively identify the damaged regions in the course of the earthquake.results of the com- puter based analysis to be identified on'a one-to-one basis with -the actual structural components. This permits the . which will also permit the inclusion of various fo~s hysteresis loops. full scale analysis of the combined shear wall and reinforced concrete frame.3 Assumed Damage Mechanism A different analytical modelIng is employed :in place of soft story concept. This is due to the fact that time history analysis is an accurate. Rather than employing an accurate.7). system and the time history analysis. 3.5. 4. but laborious approach. Th~ planar structural system is analyzed without any reduction in number of members or joints. time history analysis. if the reduction of the two dimensional structural system into a much simpler one can not be accurately done.e.e. In the design of the not been considered. reduction of the structural.

It was observed that the struttural fram~ stistains very small amounts of damage. Thus.58 MFa. the type of damage that is considered is the diagonal cracks in the walls at each floor level o In actual structural damage the cracked shear wall panels do not necessarily happen at each and every floor. in . than the structural system is analyzed for By changing the amount of imposed static and/or dynamic loads. in the research. it is than possible to simulate the structural systems with various degrees of structural degradation. damage. if any.taken. The modulus of elasticity for beams is 21.53 GPa 18 . in the phase of the research dealing with the cracked shear walls only. Different amounts of structural =deg-radation are imposed on the shear wall. while the shear wall is exhibiting some form of cracking. while'the compres- sive strength of the concrete for columns and shear walls is assumed to be 27. Therefore.the research it is assumed that the beams and columns remain linearly elastic. 3. This eliminates one -of the major obstacles in the parametric investigation. i~ is assumed that shear wall exhibits the same type of damage at each floor level (Fig.5 Mechanical Properties The concrete for beams in both frames is assumed to have a 28 day cylinder compressive strength of 20. for the sake of simplicity. 24). which is the variation of---the' amount of damage and extent of spread in the shear wall.6S5 MFa.

and for columns and shear walls is 24.86 GPao'Poisson's ratio for

the concrete is taken as 0.15.
3.6

Analytical Modeling
The static and dynamic response of the structural system is

simulated using the finite element displacement method and program
SAP IV (Refs o 1,6).

The dynamic analysis is carried out using the

modal superposition technique.

19

*
*

The contribution of the floor stiffnesses is

Secondary effects, such as

p-~

negle~ted.

effects, are not

included.

Modeling of Cracked Walls

3.6.2

The cracked shear walls are simulated by ffi?difying the
elastic properties of

th~

appropriate plane stress finite

elements (shear wall) in the appropriate directions.

Plane

stress elements in the assumed cracked regions are modeled as
anisotropic.

The modulus of elasticity perpendicular to the

assumed crack direction is reduced by a predetermined amount.
The modulus of elasticity in the direction parallel to the
cracks is assumed to remain constant.

The average shear

modulus is computed using the formulae for anisotropic materials
(Ref. 6).

The Poisson's ratio is kept constant for cracked

and uncracked walls o

By changing the modulus of elasticity in the direction
perpendicular to the cracking, a different amount of stiffness

degradation is approximated.

Slightly damaged shear walls can

be simulated with a slight reduction in the modulus of elasticity; whereas severely damaged walls will require substantial
reduction in the modulus of elasticity.

The results presented

in Chapter 4 are based on slight-to-moderately damaged shear

walls.

20

3.6.3

Piecewise Linearization
The correct analytical simulation of the structural

system requires the use of numerous beam-column elements and
plane stress elements, as well as input of the time history of
the ground motion.

The equations of motion, one second order

qifferential equation per degree of freedom, need to be solved
for each increment of time.

The stresses at the members can

then be computed, and the elastic properties will be modified,
using the proper nonlinear stress-strain relationship and
failure criteria, if need be.

A formulation as such would

yield a continuous "smooth" nonlinear response curve for the
structural systemo

However, this scheme requires extremely

large computational efforts, so much so that it would not
permit the execution of a parametric investigation.
The reported research employs a piecewise linearization

of the inelastic response of the structural system.

Rather

than determining the level of degradation in the elastic
properties of the shear wall, depending upon the state of

stress, the elastic properties of a given region are preassigned simulating the possible damage that the shear wall
would have, exhibited.

Therefore, the obtained response curve

will not be a "smooth" continuous curve, but a combination of
straight ,line segments within the vicinity of the actual curve.
The accuracy of the reported approach could be increased,

21

This is a nearly impossible require- ment. it should be realized that the attainment of the exact "smooth" response curve could not be accomplished by this. by altering the preassigned damage patterns a small amount from one configuration to another.depending upon the availability . approach unless the analyst is familiar with the location of the initiation of damage. and its spread pattern. 22 . o f the computer resources'. However. especially if the structural system is not a trivially simple one.

the main emphasis of 'the results presented is in regard to the behavior of the structural system when subjected to lateral loads. Deflection profiles for selected frame-shear wall configurations. as most finite element method based investigations do. for the sake of brevity the emphasis in the presentation of the resul±s is placed on deflection profiles. Percentages of base shear-taken by the frame and by the shear wall for chosen combinations of frame-shear wall configurations.1 RESULTS General Comments The primary interest of this investigation is to identify trends for reinforced concrete frame-shear wall systems in order to provide means of assessing the effectiveness of a particular shear wall prior to a more refined analysis or redimensioning 0 Although'dead and live loads are considered in the analysis. of post-cracked Special attention is devoted to the study ch~racteristics of the structural systems. Specifi- cally. 4.4. 23 . ~he reported research resulted in a massive amount of information. the information reported herein related only to lateral loads. even though the optimum design is one which makes total use of the shear wall to carry lateral and vertical loads (Ref o 14)0 Therefore. It· is assumed that the primary function of the shear wall is to provide the necessary'stiffness to resist lateral loads. the informatiqn presented in this report corresponds to: 1. 2. however.

the one frequently used is the deflection profile because it represents the best index to show the effectiveness of a shear wall on a frame system and vice versao Figs. c. as it can be observed. 1 and 2 show deflection profiles for .3. 3 shows the deflec- tion profile for the combined structural system and. 4. 24 . and the ·deflection index measured as the lateral displacement at the top is smaller than in the first two cases o The effectiveness- of frame-shear wall interaction can be best illustrated by the following exampleo The Marina City tower is the first known build- ing in which the lateral load was assigned to the frame and to the central core resulting in a top lateral displacement of 100 millimeters.isolated frame. An initial analy~is was performed assigning the ent~re lateral load only'to" the shear wall resulting in a top lateral displacement of 400 millimeters. Natural periods of vibration and dynamic characteristics of the structural systems. Changes in distribution of base shear.and shear wall respectivelyG Fig.2 Post-cracked wall behavior of . Deflection profiles and top deflection increments o b. 4. the deflected shape is quite different from the first·two. Increments in natural periods of vibration o Deflection Profiles Even though there are several parameters which ca~ be used to "measure" the interaction between frames and shear walls.the -system related to: a.

patterns is shown in each figure: + - Frame alone 6 .e.Type B configuration It can be noted that there exists a similarity between the deflection prof.The higher value appears to be more appro- prtate for the traditional building types of several decades ago where so-called "non-structural" heavy masonry walls increased 25 . 3).Type A configuration Frame-Shear Wall System .Deflection profiles for Frame-i-Shear Wall and for-Frame 2Shear Wall conf-igurations are plotted in Figs. . It is important to note that the differences in floor displacements and top deflections between Type A and Type B c?nfigurations"become smaller as the shear wall length increases~ configuration produces the stiffest In all cases Type B frarne-s~ear wall combination. rather than the ". This is due to (1) 'increase in the total horizontal length (i. "D") of the structural system. 9-13 and 14-18 respectively.Frame-Shear ¢- Wall System . and (2) placement of the shear wall at the extremity of the structure. A total of~ four dis- placement. The deflection profiles for each frame and shear wall alone are included in each figure to illustrate the deformation mode for each structure and to provide bases to evaluate the effect of one of the structures on the other.iles for Type A and Type B configurations. depending upon the judgment of the engineer (Ref.core." Values ranging from 1/300 to 1/600 have been used in practice as drift limits due to wind loads.Shear wall alone * .

1 to 93.1 to 11.5 millimeters for Frame 1 and 185. the top deflection exceeded the sway index by 6%.6 to 65. A reasonable value of about 1/400 yields results of 94.8 millimeters for Frame I-Shear Wall Type A configuration'and from 17. as originally designed.considerably the lateral stiffness of frames. is more susceptible to wind effect. top deflections are well within the drift limit. are extracted from the computer outputs and are shown in' rrable :1 and Tab-le . top deflection varies from 196.8 millimeters for Type A and Type B configurations respectively. is rigid enough to support lateral loads and that wind loads have very little effect on it.1 millimeters for Frame I-Shear Wall Type B configuration as the shear wall length increases. 4. Frame 2. For the shorter shear wall length Type A configuration.4 millimeters and from 99. For all choices of the shear wall dimensions on Frame 1.1 to 17. although the top lateral displacement for Frame 2 alone is within the drift limit. taken by the frame and ~by the shear wall. however. Top deflection varies from 41.2 millimeters for Frame 2.2 for Frame I-Shear ~Wall configurations and for Frame 2-Shear Wall configurations 26 . For Frame 2-Shear Wall configurations. This indicates that this frame. The top deflection of Frame 1 alone is also within this limit.3 Distribution of Base Shear The total horizontal forces at the base. With the actual trends of using "lightweight elements as partitions and walls a relatively smaller value has been used.

However.. range from 75% to 92% for Type A configuration and from 52% to 79% for Type B configuration. On the other hand. 19 and 20 respectively. A and Type B configurations produce approximately the same distribution. configuration. shown in Table 1.respectively. indicates tha~ Type . A graphic representation of the percentages of "base shear on Frame 1 and on Frame 2 is plotted in Figs. which indicates the effectiveness of the shear wall on this frame. Percentages of base shear on shear wall for Frame 1-Shear Wall configurations. percentage of base shear on shear wall for Frame 2-Shear Wall configurations. The graphic representation of the percentages of base shear taken by the frames. These values indicate how stiff this frame is as originally designed and the relatively small effect of the shear wall on this frame. shown in Table 2. ranges from 91% to 96% for Type ~ configuration and from 78% to S9% for Type B. shown in Figs. Percentages of base shear as a fraction of the total lateral force applied are determined and are also shown in Tables -1 and 2. the percentage of base shear taken by the frame part in Type B configuration is larger than the percentage of base 27 . for the different configurations and for the different shear wall lengths. This conclusion could be expected since this building is relatively short and can be designed relying upon the rigidity of the frame connections to carry lateral loads. 19 and 20.

4. be~ bay. are computed based on T values from finite element analysis (SAP IV) and on T values from UBC formulae. The word "STATIC" in both figures stands for the natural periods of vibration as determined by the UBC recommendations. used to compute the total equivalent lateral force (V = ZIKCSW) for earthquake analysis. although it is not the most appropriate name e "c" factors. 21 for Frame i-Shear Wall . frame- shear wall configurations are determined using the finite element program SAP IV and the Uniform Building Code (UBC) recommendations (Ref. 20 . while the percent variation for 28 . and are also presented in Tables 3 and 4. The graphic representa- tion of these values appears in Fig. configurations and in Fig. 22 for Frame 2-Shear Wall configurations. which Finally. which is reasonable because ·the shear wall is more effective as its length increases.4 Seismic Considerations Natural periods of vibration for the frames and for the.see Section 3)0 The values obtained are shown in Table 3 for Frame 1 and in Table 4 for Frame 2.shear taken by the frame p~rt ~n Type A configuration due to the effect of the third column line and the second are not included in the latter configur~tion. va~iation The in T between finite element analysis (SAP IV) and UBC formulae ranges from 40% to 65%. these two figures also show that the difference in base shear taken' by the frame part of the frame-shear wall system becomes smaller as the shear wall length increases.

It can be noted that natural periods of vibration from UBC recommendations are smaller than the values obtained by finite element analysis (SAP IV). It is possible that the natural period of vibration of the actual structure will be less than the value obtained by the analysis due to stiffening non-structural elements such as partitions. which means that UBC recommendations consider stiffer structures which take more earthquake loads.4 to 1. walls. For the design of frame-shear wall systems to resist earthquake loads using UBC recommenda'tions. 19). these' secondary structural components are not explicitly contained in the UBC recommendations and the comparison of natural periods of vibration carried out in this investigation is still valid. The periods of vibration assymptotically approach zero seconds as the stiffness of the structure approaches infinity. decrease with increasing shear wall length. From the graphic representation it can be observed that the variation. However. elevator shafts and stairs. as well as the actual periods of vibration themselves for Type A and Type B configurations.7 times the equivalent static load if the natural period of vibration from UBC formulae is used. the structure has to withstand from 1. Comparison of fundamental periods of the frame-shear wall co~figurations determined by the-finite element analysis and by the approximate formula of the-Applied Technology Council is presented in Appendix-A (Ref.the "C" factor ranges from 3070 to 7070. 29 .

Frame-Cracked Shear Wall .Frame-Uncracked Shear Wall . 30 the label iden- tifies the plot for the specific combination Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall A.the plot.Type B Configuration In addition. For instance. different symbols are used for the configuration types and for the shear wall conditions: + ~ uncracked or cracked. 25-29 and Figs. The effect of the cracked wall on the deflection profiles cannot be observed easily for shorter shear wall lengths in the Frame 1-Shear Wall configurations. at the botton of each figure the~e is a label which identifies the particular shear wall whose results are .Frame-Cracked Shear Wall .4.5. shown in . because of the relatively little importance of the shear wall in the overall 30 .Type B Configuration 9 .Type A Configuration . configurations are plotted in the same figures to provide a basis for comparison. for Fig •. 30-34 respectively. A total of four displacement patterns is plotted in each figure. Deflection profiles for the uncracked frame-shear wall". In order to distinguish the deflection patterns.Type A Configuration * .. The symbols used are: Frame-Uncracked Shear Wall . whose shear wall length is 367 centimeters.1 Deflection Profiles Deflection profiles for Frame l-Cracked Shear Wall and for Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations are shown in Figs.5 Post-Cracked Behavior 4.

As the shear wall length increases the effect of the cracking becomes more important and the deflection profi~es present an appreciable lateral displacement increment.5.01% to 27% for Frame I-Cracked Shear Wall configurations and from 3. ·as well as the deflections themselves. The. Top deflections incremented from 0. The effect of the cracked wall in the Frame 2-Shear Wall configurations . It also presents the same tendency of becoming more important as the shear wall length increases. for shorter shear wall lengths. 35 and 36 respectively.behavior of the system for this particular case. For both cases the increment is larger for Type A configuration since the shear wall is more important in this case. and graphically in Figs. Increases in top deflection are determined for Frame 1Cracked Shear Wall and for the Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations and the values are reported in Tables 5 and 6. 4. although noticeable enough.is relatively small. 31 . increase as the shear wall length increases.5% to 41% for Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations.variations of top deflection between Type A and Type B configurations.2 Distribution~0f Base Shear The "total reaction lateral forces acting on frame and on shear wall are determined by applying the same procedure used before for the uncrac~ed shear wall-frame configurations.

5. The values presented in these tables are shown graphically in Figs. Plots of the percentages of base shear taken by the frame part of the frame-cracked shear wall systems are. for the different frame-cracked shear wall configurations.presented in Figs. are determined and presented in Tables 9 and 10 for Frame i-Cracked Shear Wall and for Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations respectively.50% to 22% for Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations~ In both cases the increment of base shear is larger for Type B configuration. 4. Percentage increments of base shear acting on frame. which is a reasonable result because of the more relevant effect of the frame in this configuration type. These values range from 0. Percentages of base shear on shear wall range from 52% to 92% for Frame I-Cracked Shear Wall configurations and from 78% to 95% for Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations.3 Seismic Characteristics Post-cracked shear wall effects on the dynamic character- istics of the frame-shear wall configurations are considered in 32 .Percentages of base shear are determined as a fraction of the total base shear and the results are presented in Tables 7 and 8 for Frame I-Cracked Shear Wall and for Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations respectively. 37 and 38.70% to 13% for Frame i-Cracked Shear Wall configurations and from 0. 39 and 40 respectively.

increase with increasing shear wall length. A tendency similar to the one exhibited by the frame-uncracked shear wall configurations is observed. as well as the actual periods of vibration themselves for Type A and Type B configurations.are determined using the finite element program SAP IV and the results are. Percentage increments in natural period of vibration are determined and reported in Tables 11 and 12 and plotted in Figs. Larger effects. as expected. Natural periods of vibration under these circumstances . reported in Figs. 33 . The variation in natural periods of vibration increments. Also as expected. as well as the increments themselves. decrease' with increasing shear wall length. Natural period of vibration increments range from a very small value to 14% for Frame l-Cracked Shear Wall and from 2% to 20% for Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations. are reported in Type A configuration for both cases due to the larger contribution to the stiffness of the overall system done by the shear wall in this case. The variations in natural periods of vibration.the investigation process. natural periods report larger increments for Frame 2~Cracked Shear Wall configurations. 41 and 42 for Frame i-Cracked Shear Wall and for Frame 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations respectively. 43 and 44 for Frame i-Cracked Shear Wall and for Fr~e 2-Cracked Shear Wall configurations respectively.

2. 6. Special attention must be given to the design of frameshear wall systems to match sway requirements as the height of the structure increases.t-cracked behavior of the frame-shear wall systems. The following conclusi9ns may be drawn from this research: 1 0 The type of frame-shear wall configuration has less and less effect on the lateral displacements as .4 to 1. Special attention must be given to the design of frameshear wall systems to support earthquake loads when using UBC recommendations.7 times the equivalent static load if the ~ value from UBC formulae is used. Ductility provisions are to be established to assure safe pos. the shear wall length increases. CONCLUSIONS In order to provide guidelines for assessing the effectiveness of a particular shear wall on a re1nforced concrete frame. The percentage of base shear taken by the frame was approximately 15io for "reasonable" choices of shear wall dimensions and frame member sizes. 34 .5. The differences in natural periods of vibration between Type A and Type B configurations become smaller as the shear wall length increaseso 5. The structure has to withstand from 1. two previously designed frames were· linked to five shear walls in two different configuration types. 3. 4.

Percentage increm~nts ranged from 1% to 22%. 7. 35 .8.Lateral displacement increments ranged from 3% to 40%. 9. Additional parametric studies should be conducted on frame-undamaged-shear wall combinations of different geometries to verify the quantitative findings of the reported research. Additional parametric studies referred to in conclusion No. 8. of base shear taken by the frames Increments in natural periods of vibration were reported up to 20%. 7 should be extended to damaged configurations parallel to conclusion No. Additional parametric studies should be conducted for the investigated frames with damage of different magnitude.

TABLES 36 .

8l~ ..70 79..SIfEAR FR1ll1E 1 .40 ~*87 .1.76. 92.40 90. 61~ 217373.76 37.60 62..80 59l~25.84 31 LI·562.84 167783.60 87 .76 43723.10' 69. 1 Ol+G~·3 • 65 2l~363It.90' ll-26..80 13090 Lf.J Type B Base Shear (l:revJtons) On Fran18 all Percentage of Base Shear Sllear \iVall On Frarae 011 Shear VIall 85801.3 262l~ 9/+. 70 75.68 7193.28 288853. *The shear wall width remained constant: 75 - width = 30.31.10 82.30 30l r.8.~.0 l t 7.12 17.72 8578 Ll·.90 365.72 ' 33·715.l~O 365.36 321279.84 30L~55LI·. 56 9.TABLE 1: DISTRIBUTIOI'I OF BASE .1- 20. 27 2L~.68 26999.80 304.30 2l~3. 30.3~O6 276345.60 1+87.20 51.92 262/+ 76 • II-8 2L~.SIIEAR \VALL CONFIGURATIOl\TS Sllear lflall- Shear VIall Frame Length-x~ Configur~tiolJ (Cell tinleters) Type A W -.01 18011-95.48 centimeters.80 .O 426.20 2L(·3. 60 75. . 56 12..39 !j..

72 11521J·7. l 1-0 5L~8.30 87070 609.76 142291. .60 2L~908.50 94.68 539453.20 487.0 Ll·87.70 78.50 95. 76 10.lt O 609998.68 95543.76 57512.80 96.01+ 559158..08 1LI-_ 60 85. 3.32 .44 4.64 cent~meters.20 426.64 597188 .3·6 585ll~45.50 5L~8.72 6.11 365.60 69255.f30 91.80 .28 5. 93.52 512L~09.~·O *The shear wall width remained constant: width = 40. 618761.8~.SlIEAR VIALL COl'TFIGURATIOtTS S11ear Viall - Shear Viall Franle Leneth)t Configuratioll (Centiraeters) Type A LV CO Type B Base Shear (}levltons) On Fran18 On Shear Viall Percentage of Base Shear On Frame On Shear \·18.lt~8 8.30 l~26. 80 629792.72 574014.50 609.68 35939.20 365.60 21.60 89.40 12.60 82.72 4~Lt 702 .l.L~4 17. 64 29623068 625077.TABLE 2: DISTRIBUTION OF BASE SlIEAR FRftl1E' 2 . 64 80686.

37 2LI·3.702 1.18 30 l .15 0.3: TABLE Shear \Vall- Frame Configuration S. L~O 2L~3.270 0.787 58.000 41.25 L.679 -0..720 0.81lJ- 64.> "" 365.046 . 0.88 0. 80 2. Period Lcngth* SAP IV (Sec) (Cras) Perj_od UI3C (SE:C) Percent "c" .99 O.Olf8 0.75 426.:."051 0..074 68.92 O.35 3011-. VI. .02 487.48 centimeters.800 61.075 56.051 0.044 0.759 o.639 59-91 0.562 0.078 0.763 51.053 0.43 O.076 49.~~ 95 Frame 1 Type A NATURAL I)ERIODS OF VIBRATION v.68 1.05lt· 0.076 43.0 SAP IV 1.775 5~·.Ol~9 0.050 .68 1..051 0.832 63.893 0.52 0.6 11-6 61.083 62".083 56.60 487.84 2.25 0.082 67.506 00633 57. 8 I t 1. 6E.80 1.075 63.14 0. 911- ·0.50 0. 0.26. 6~j3 62.76 Type B ~ *The shear wall width remained constant: width = 30..067 31.04 1.72 1.082 61+_ 00 365076 1. Fac tor ItC" Factor Percent Variation Based on Based on Variation (CI) (~b) UBC .72 1 • 59 l f 0.053 0.08/(- 5L. 1 o.

047 30. 72 3. 00036 9.nle 2 Type A N.17 .685 L~26.72 3.394 58.11 0.263 1.036 0.67 LI- 1 ~624 55.l!~ 12 59050 0.60 30058 1 ~358 .208 1n376 57.55.057 54.051 59038 1.l-8.569 50.962 487.58 o+' 3.035 0.158 1.036 0.76 4.47 0.056 55.035 0.033 0.486 1 .59 0.29 0.a'-G Il I3ased on centimeters.653 58~28 0.038 0.057 50.32 0.6'-~ 3.l~O6 1 ~595 53.80 0. .68 3. 1t? Type B 365.ength* Variatiol1 (Sec) lTBG (Sec) 3.056 55.052 48.76 3..L1.052 57. I. L1-32 60.45 365.00 If26.032 0.22 609.60 3.68 (Cms) Fr8. VI. 64 3.05 609.038 0.56 4·87.·352 1.41 00036 0.TURAL PERIODS OF VIBRATION *Thc shear vlaJ.56 51.l vfidth rcrnaincd constant: (?~) \Ilidth UGH Based on SAP IV = LJ.00 Period SAP IV PeI~iod Percent Factor lien Factor Percent Variation «(~I ) /0 S.606 1 .056 60.000 l~ 1 .0 53 l~7 .57 5l~8.053 39.56 60. L~ 16 2.TABLE 4: Shear 'flaIl- Frame Configttrat-ion UEC 0.037 0.

ration (Centimeters) Type A ~ .926 22.76 14. 125 0.809 15.48 coptimeters.8 Lt 17. 839 33.01 304. 25.1!'.056 0001 304. 175 llt·o 14 4·87.058 17.26 2 l l-3.732 12.S Deflection (Milimeters) Cl'acked Uncracked Percentage Increment Top Deflection 243.639 1.621 8.55 426..828 11.881 .09 365..TABLE 5: TOP DJ~FLECTION FRAl'1E 1 .68 12.125 15.810 27.72 .80 If-87. Type B ~op II~CRmJl..76 29.84 1-1-1 • 128 LI-1. .883 27.80 15.31 *The shear wall width remained constant: width = 30. 11~4 4..NT COl'lFIGUI~ATION.80 3l~.529 8.SIIEAR \VALL Shear vVall - Frame Shear Viall Lengtll* Cohfigl1.68 22.83 365..713 14..72 13.665 17.. 2.02 L(-26..

57 609.69 548.68 92.20 487. 12~26 '548.366 7.TABLE 6: TOP DEFLECTION "FRM1E 2 .60 82.16 L!-26~ 72 186.96 487.096 7.11!-3 '18.64 centimeters.J.68 165.ed Top Deflection Shear Viall Fre~nl0 Type A +' N Type B 365.uration (Cen tinleters) Cracltcd Uncracl{.00 *The shear wall width remained constant: width = 40.88 609<160 131.SHEAR WAL~ INCRE}1J~NT CONFIGURATIONS Shear \Vall Top Deflection (Milimeters~ Percentage Length* Increlnent Confic.72 97.76 103.101 99.626 3.906 82.134 196.~06 40. .8/+ 365.~~15 135.-557 93.76 210.64 11~·7. 93 l t- 650822 26.912 74.49 426.629 30.928 21.940 91.721 13.761. 406 112. 6l~ 87.060 163.

" 51.70 *The shear wall width remained const~nt: width = 30.33 12.0 .20 1+26.84 86L~27 .38 261851.37 255800.30 365.84 167938.00 L1-87.20 304.10 68.70 304·.r (1~ evvtons) On Fra.90 426. 72 34756.80 87.1+38 • 07 3038 11. Sllea.00 90.52 267146.66 2 I tOOOO.88 23.74 31.lt· O .68 81131 .73 10. Type A +:"- w Type B SIIE~~· VIALL COI~FIGURATIONS Base.20 37.68 29210.40 487.03 '26.76 4 l l.CRACKED Sllear \1aJ.TABLE 7: DISTRIBUTIO~T OF BASE SIIE1\R E'RAl1E 1 .30 76.48 centimeters.38 8.60 24~3. 97 17..02 319068.80 365.76 108277.73 48. l JJcne.80 60123. 80 75.L~3 2881514-.67 180339.70 62.tll i tConfiguration (Centinleters) S11ear Viall Fraule .fie On Shear 'I!all Percentage of Base Shear On Frame On Sllear rIall 243. .67 313521.20 82.80 131327.02 2l~. 91.40 .72 92478.60 73.20 216951.

Shear ~Vall .90 608662.10 . 1+0 365.TABLE 8: DISTRIBUTIOI~ OF BASE SIIEAR FRAI1E 2 . 6'-t~ 4301+0. 85060 . 40.20 487.03 8.98 L~.30 77070 L~26..64 centimeters.64 91!·350.98 560339.j' width = _.02 ·14.08 18.8.86 22.68 106707.60 95.06 57009709 LJ- 12.72 Lf-6027.68 3900L~.30 83\t70 5 l .54 6206lt9.76 l 1r6130.L~O 609.~·6 5.10 ll·26.02 62l1-367.97 596860. 72 123053092 531636.00 94. Franlc Lene t11 * Configuration (Centimeters) Type A . L~9 6.90 91 .00 487..[f8· 16.60 84592.00 93.J> +' Type B Base Shear all Franle COI~FIGURATIOl~.90 *The shear wall width remained constant: .10 7.76 57829.60 30322.S (I\I evvt ons ) On S110ar Percentage of Base Shear ~Vall On Fralne On Shear 'VIall 365. 87.52 5LJ-7982. 51 615685. 80 609.80 81.CRACKED S}IEAR· \yALL Shear Viall .00 5 L}8. lIt· 508559.20 9l~.

67 33715. 7. *The shear wall width remained constant: 8578l~.ength* .l~8 centimeters.72 92J~78. 07 1+3723.84 '·"67938.01 0.3.52 .80 131327.19 2 L. 13·· .se Sllear Type A +' Ln Type B 243.02 26999.l~7 '426.64 0.80 71933.76 108277.8l t 1.09 487.32 365..SHEAR ViALL COl'TFIGTJRATIOl'lS BASE SE£EAR: Il'1CRElviENT Shear \Vall- Shear Y/all ~ase Shear on Frame (Nl'!t.38 85801.09 30 l t-.67 167783. Frame IncI-ement Confj_gtlration (Centimeters) Cracked VIall Uncracked Vial] Bt'3.66 104·6L~3.37 487.79 width = 30.36 8.68 29210.l~3 59L~25. 8L~ 3. .80 60123.73 30 l f.20 130904.63 ' 4·26.68 81.27.84 86 11. 72 34756.131 .76 4~·438. 28 1 • 17 365.. 65 3.06 12.92 0.TABIJ1~ 9: FRAl~1E 1 . ) Percentage r.

68 .15 *The shear wall width remained constant: width = 1+0. 16. 6J~~ 0.97 I t 87.SIIEAR \VALL CalfFI GURArr rONS .Shear Vlall- Shear VIall Base Shear on Frame (NVlt.72 .72 123{)53.FRJU1E 2 .04 11 . 69 8.64 3l~()L~O • 54- 29623.92 1152/+7.76 .76 57829. 106707.55 426.64 centimeters.77 487.52 9551+3.90 44702.36 22.93 609.80 21. 35939.40 2.68 1 Lt. ..TABLE 10: BASE SIIEAR II'lCRB~lElqT .84 548.07 57512. lIt 142291. 548.70 426.72 /+6027.06 69255.73 365.52 2.02 24908. ) Percentage Frame Length* Illcrement Configuration (Centimeters) Cracl{ed Viall Uncraclred VIall Base Shear Type A +' 0' Type B 365. 91 609. 98 80686.68 3900 LI-_ 51 .68 6.60 30322.60 84592. 1 Lt 6 130.53 .64 9L~:350.

68 1. .84 487.832 1 Q832 .76 1. 8I r 1.676."562 13.76 1.62 1+26. Frame ~onfiguration Type A I~JCREr·JI:EI'JT SIIEAF! 'VAIJjJ COI~FIGURATIOlJS Shear Viall Lengtl1* (Cen-tirrlcters) N8~tural Period Craclccd (.80 1. 2.h = 30.75 4~6.720 8.759 0.72 1 .506 8. 2L~3.80 2.91 365.273 2.6l(.37 ~ '" Percentage Increment *The shear \vall v/idth relnainccl constant: wid'l.270 0.679 . 1.723 1. 68 1.72 1.632 1.983 1.115 2.775 1.NATURAL PERIOD OF VIBRATIOl'l TABLE 11: FRAl~1E 1 - Shear V/all- .78 365.872 1. 8l~ 2.078 1. -0- 304.48 centimeters.893 4.775 1.13 304.14 l~87.Seconds) Ullcrncl~ed Type B (~6) 24-3.594 5.

1~O6 15. VI13RATION II'lCREMENT FRAME 2 .• 4L~2 4.058 13.38 426.50 L~87.352 7.60 3.3. Cl"'acked (Seconds) Uncraclted Percentage Increment (~~) 365.t: \vidth = L~O .591 3..76 ~.64 *The shear viall \vidtll remained constal).64 3.SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATIONS Shear \VallFl"'ame Shear VIall Length~* Configuration (Centinleters) Type A .692' 3. 091 3.475 ' 3.72 3. . 68 J~.933 3 .535 3.48 It-87 e 68 .76 3.2 3. 1-{-86 4.1 o.158 19.po. ex:> Type B Na-Gural Period.962 7.79 365.64 3.606 2.674 11.35' 5l!-8.259 3.20 426.6L(.TABLE 12: NATURAL PERIOD OF. 9 609.13 '548. ..60 3-783 3.208 .263 4.4-7 609.72 4. 64 centimeters.

FIGURES 49 .

azrJ lira· lira' . SHEAR WALL DEFORMATION FIGU.RE 1 50 .

ilia· III.. RIGID FRAME DEFORMATION FIGURE 2 51 .

FR.AME-SHEAR WALL FIGURE 3 52 .

" II o 4TH CD It) ~ 7:. .5 Pat UVE Lo 958 Po. LEVEL "ROOF.. "BASE n r? . DEAD LOAD 7424. 2395 Po. 8TH ~ 6TH C\I .'5 Po. FLO'OR 6945. WIND LOAD GRAVITY LOAD ROO F TV PI CA L'. ---l 760 I 915 2ND .DESI GN LOADS 1197~5 Po.760 I FRAMES SPACED AT 820 CENTIM~~E RS FRAME I DIMENSIO~S AND DESrGN' LOADS FIGURE 53 4 .

70 x 70 40 x 80 75 x 75 42.5 x 85 85 x 85 42.s x 6 5 !7.5 x 75 '55x 55 65x 37.5 x 75 55 x 55 80 x 60 60 x 60 65 x 65 65 t.5 x 85 70 x 70 75 x 75 75 )t 42.37.5 x 8S 85 K 85 75 I T7// //// FRAME MEMBER I SIZES FIGURE 54 //// 5 .5 'x 85 70 x 70 80 x 80 42.5 x 75 70 x 70 40 )( 8 0 .5 x 85 75 x 75 65 x 65 42.

70 16TH 1005.02 4TH 1396.02 a -- en 1'281.5' Po.70 88070 880.36 0 It) ~ ~7 600 1 n ?.. 23 0 q-o Q) -D 8 TH 1263.23 II 1281.WIND LOAD lI97.'r7 t 600 I 600 t BAS E FRAMES SPACED AT 750 eMS.23 '26~ .25 14 TH 1005.25 1005.67 2ND 1396067 1423. LEVEL STORY WEIGHT (KN) ROOF 782.67 1396.85 18TH 880. rt> 6TH 1281.02 0 CD _.83 1040. FRAME 2 01 MENSIONS AND DESIGN FIGURE 55 6 LOADS .83 10TH 1263.25 1040.83 12TH 1040.

~ 55 x 55 62.5 FRAME 2 MEM BER SIZES FIGURE 7 56 . 5 65 K 65 77.5 x 52.5 K 55 60 x 60 62..5 47.5 55 525 x 52.5 x 6Z's 65 I 65 75 .5 x 47:5 57:Sx S7.. 75 65x 65 65 x 77i~ ~1/ ~".5 x 47.. 65 77.5 47.5 x 77.MEMBER SIZES (CENTIMETERS) BEAMS COLUNNS EXTERIOR INTERIOR 35 x ~S 40)( 40 451 45 52.5 x 77.5 x 62.

I /7.?.'7>'7 T YP E T Y PEA /7// / I'~ B FRAME-SHEAR WALL CONFIGURATIONS FIGURE 57 8 / ."' / 1////'7 ~ "/ / / . 1/ 'F ~ I ~ .J ~ ~ II "' "' I W I.

....-.------+--.. DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME i-SHEAR WALL R S W LENGTH=244 eN FIGURE 9 Il Il 58 50 .......J - 6TH >- 0::: 0 f(jJ 4TH ~ -SHEAR WALL ONLY 2ND A+ $+ )IE * -FRANE ONLY -TYPE A • -TYPE B BASE .J w > w -..........---.. o 10 20 30 40 DEFLECTIONS (MILINETERS).----+--"'---r'-.----+--.10TH +~ 8TH .-----.

w.' *+)IE A _IE 2ND ~ +' . LENGTH=305 eM FIGURE 10 59 50 . -SHEAR WALL ONLY -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE R JIIIf-. • -TYPE 6 BASE 0 10 20 30 40 DEFLECTIONS (MILIMETERS) DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME l-SHEAR WRLL B S.-J 6TH 11I+ >- cr: )I( * JIt+ 0 I-- (J) 4TH lit + * .-J w > w .10TH 8TH ~+ .

e+ 10TH )I( JlIt+ * 8TH -J w > w -J + JE' -.+ 6TH + aIR >a::: 0 .- lit )IE * +)IE (J) 4TH -9IE $ *-- 2ND JIl*+ ~ +' • -SHEAR WALL ONLY -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE A * -TYPE f3 BASE 0 10 40 DEFLECTIONS (MIL'INETERSl 20 30 DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME i-SHEAR WALL C S. LENGTH=366 CM FIGURE 11 60 50 . w.

. **+ • & 2ND + -SHEAR HALL ONLY -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE A lSI -TYPE B BASE 0 10 30 40 DEFLECTIONS (MILIMETERS) 20 DEFLECTION PROFILES FRRME l-SHEAR WRLL 0 SaWa LENGTH=427 eM FIGURE 12 61 SO .J > lJ.J + * + * 6TH * (f) 4TH ~.. ~ $ • IJ..J • )19- *+ ..10TH 8TH . * >- I- A +- III Q:: 0 )IE * + lit --J lJ...

~ . en 4TH _)IE A JIE+ -- W A A. 8TH --' > w --' 6TH 1&1 *+ __ * + )- 0::: 0 .10TH +)IE lit 4.. LENGTH=488 eM FIGURE 13 62 50 .. Ai&. 2ND + -SHEAR WALL ONlY -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE * -TYPE B ~ BASE a 10 20 30 40 DEFLECTIONS (MILINETERSl DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME i-SHEAR WALL E S.. w.. ..

. LENGTH=366 eM FIGURE 14 63 250 . DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME 2-SHERR WALL R s.20TH -.+ 10TH *+ *+ (f) 8TH III + IE $ +JE _-ale . 12TH >0:: ~ IE )IE a1I+ -+ )IE -. IE • *IE ~ - - • tt + -SHEAR HALL ONLY -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE t:l * -TYPE 8 BASE 50 • A I:! 0 - 100 150 200 DEFLECTIONS (MILIMETERS). W.+ -+ 18TH *+ *+ 16TH $+ I( IE ~+ G:J 14TH *+ *+ > ~.

.----+-.. 14TH ~ 12TH + lit >0:: ~ )IE -.. LENGTH=427 eM FIGURE 15 64 250 .20TH * 18TH * * * *+ 16TH i:d > LLJ ~.-~!'____.----t-.A Lh A • + ~SHEAR WALL ONLY -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE R ZIt -TYPE B BASE -----Io--.......... o 50 100 150 200 DEFLECTIONS (MILIMETERS)· DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME 2-SHEAR WALL B S.._-._____..-III 111*111*+ A ++- )IE - )IE )IE A -ale - A • • A .... w....+ + + *+ + + + + lit 10TH J&t (f) lit 8TH 112 _.

o 50 100 150 200 250 DEFLECTIONS (HILIMETERS)...12TH ~ 10TH -.---+-------. + -SHEAR HALL ONLY -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE .----+--. w..-----+--. 8TH ~ ~ ~ • ~ _+..~ Itt -TYPE B BASE ~---"-..* + * + ** + * +_ JII 20TH 18TH +)IE 16TH G:i ~ 14TH _ ~.~ ..6.-----+--. III )IE + " +3IE -ate 1It)l+ JCt + - * IE-* lit __ U") . • & + "... LENGTH=488 eM FIGURE 16 65 ... )I +)IE > >a:: )I _+6 4t)IE . DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME 2-SHEAR WALL C S....

w.20TH . ~ . AA A -..h _ b. +- -- Itt 18TH -- ~ 12TH $ -+ ~ 10TH (J) A A + + A )IE . LENGTH=549 eM FIGURE 17 66 250 .~ + All- -SHEAR HALL ONLY -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE ~ ~ * -TYPE B BASE a 50 100 150 200 DEFLECTIONS CHILIMETERSl DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME 2-SHEAR WALL 0 S..+ ~ +A $)IE --* .- + 1&1 _ + lit _ + all >- Ct:: ch JIE+ -- * A ~ $ > A )IS- lit G::l 14TH b.. )I lit 16TH .

lii 18TH GJ 14TH ~.t. ** • 8TH ate AI-.. III 3IE + ~ )IE + A + A + A__ +. 12TH >- ~ 6 .20TH lit + )IE ~ + )IE ~ + + * ~ ~ + b. 100 150 200 DEFLECTIONS (HILIMETERSL DEFLECTION PROFILES FRAME 2-SHEAR WALL E S. • A 6 ---** > Ct::: JIE - 16TH A- 3IE+ 10TH (J) -fA. W• LENGTH=610 eM FIGURE 18 67 250 .6+ 4TH + + + * -tYPE B BASE a -FRAME ONLY * -TYPE A . 6TH • A+ & • .+ 2ND -SHEAR HALL ONLY 50 .

a: lLJ :I: . 0 3 IE lli a: - + t- :z lLJ LJ '2 0:= + lLJ 0.. (J) -TYPE A 4 lLJ (J) a: co l.5 + .. +1 + 200 260 320 380 440 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) .* -TYPE B ~ . PERCENTAGES OF BASE SHEAR ON FRAME 1 FOR CHOSEN DIMENSIONS OF SHEAR WALL FIGURE 19 68 + 500 .L.

+ + 350 410 470 530 + 590 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) PERCENTAGES OF BASE SHEAR ON FRAME 2 FOR CHOSEN DIMENSIONS OF SHERR WALL FIGURE 20 69 650 . o· 1 ~ 0: IZ W u Ct:: W ·1 + Q.2 Ct:: 0: W :I: (f) + -TYPE A .* -TYPE 8 2 W (f) 0: CD l1... + .

...-TYPE B STATIC + I- a: Ck=: a::l .. A &..s o..0 ..)IE 1--1 > LL......--+-----...0 + ~ .. -TYPE A DYNAMIC + 2....--.3...--+-----. l' .----+---. 0 ~~-......'0 -l a: Ck=: :::J I- a: z h.* -TYPE B OYNAM IC 2. 200 260 320 380 sao 440 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) a NRTURRL PERIODS OF VIBRRTION FOR CHOSEN COMBINRTIONS OF FRRME 1 RND SHERR WRLLS FIGURE 21 70 .th -TYPE A STATIC ~ .......~. A ~ Z$2 C ~ &!r tr .0 .... 0 + * 1 •S aC) ~ lk: W c.6 u w U') + ""'"-' z ..

0 * CI C) ....0 o....--.......-----..0 --fo------+--. z 8 + 4..6....0 -TYPE B DYNRMIC ~ -TYPE A STATIC * -TYPE B STAT IC + J-- ec + 0::: a::J + * ~ > LL C> -TYPE A DYNAMIC 3..-J a: fr: Ill· =:) t- o: z 1.0 ..---oof---_----I-_ 350 410 470 530 590 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) 650 ~ NRTURRL PERIODS OF VIBRRTION FOR CHOSEN COMBINATIONS OF FRRME 2 RND SHERR WRLLS FIGURE 22 71 ..---+---....0 + '* 5. 0::: W CL 2....0 .

H s FflAM E -SHEAR H WALL (CENTIMETERS) 1 S-VARIABLE (CENTIMET ERS) 4· 80 240.480 FRAME I 360 240.480 FRAME 2 450 300.600 .FRAME 2 360 300-600 FRAME SHEAR WALL PANE-L ASSUME 0 CRACK FIGURE 72 23 PATTERN· .

CRACKED TYPE A / CRACKED TYPE B FRAME-CRACKE6 SHEAR · WALL CONFIGURATIONS FIGURE·24 73 ..

* 2ND ~ ~TYPE + * A -CRACKED TYPE R -TYPE B * -CRRCKED BASE TYPE B ---+--..----I------..--+---.10TH 8TH --1 W > w _J 6TH >- e:t: Cl f- (f) 4TH -.. W..... R Es=O 25Ec FIGURE 25 l> 74 SO ...CRRCKED S.. o 10 20 30 DEFLECTIONS 40 (MILIMETERS)~ DEFLECT ION PROF I LE'S FRRME 1 .-----+---r------+---..

....---+---or------+------. BRSE~--+----.10TH 8TH ...J W > W .-----+--. DEFLECTION PROFILES FRRME 1 ..------+--....CRACKED S~ W~ B Es =0 25Ec D FIGURE 26 75 SO ..J 6TH >0:::: Cl IU') 4TH )I 2ND ~ ~ + *4- -TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE A * -TYPE. o 10 20 30 40 DEFLECT I f3NS (M I LI METERS ).. B $ -CRACKED TYPE B .

CRRCKED S~ w~ C E5=0 ~ 25Ec FIGURE 27 76 50 .10TH ~ + ~+ 8TH ~+ Al+ -J W > w -.J 6TH ~+ >cr: c:J ~+ ~ (Jj 4TH _At~ 2ND ~ + * ~ -TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE A -TYPE B Itt -CRACKED TYPE B BRSE 0 10 20 30 40 DEFLECTIONS· (MILIMETERSl DEFLECT ION PROF I LE'S FRRME 1 .

Es=O 25Ec D F..10TH + ~ 8TH --J W > w --l 6TH >Ct:: C) I(Jj 4"TH ~ 2ND + -- -TYPE A -CRRCKED TYPE R * -TYPE B $ -CRACKED TYPE B .---4---...CRRCKED SD WD 0 ..IGURE 28 77 so .. BASE ------+---._-01____ o 10 20 30 40 DEFLECTIONS (MILIMETERS) DEFLECTION PROFILES FRRME 1 ._-I_____..------4~__.

TYPE A + -CRACKED TYPE R ~ -CRACKED TYPE B * -TYPE B BASE 0 10 40 DEFLECTIONS (MILIMETERSl 20 30 DEFLECTION PROFILES FRRME 1 .*$. + A + A + £ + + CJ:) 4TH ~+ -+ ~ 2ND .J 6TH *$A >~ *$4 c::J t- + 4J.J W > w -. 10TH *$ *$ 8TH *$.CRRCKED Sa Wa E Es=O a25Ec FIGURE 29 78 SO . -.

DEFLECTION PROFILES FRRME 2 .20TH HI ~ • • A MIt 16TH d 14TH £ c!l.CRRCKED S.+ • .10TH (f) Ka + + + + + + ~ ~ ~.tl+ Al+ - 8TH _Ai-- 6TH ~ -'* 4TH + ~ 2ND -TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE A * -TYPE B * -CRACKED TYPE B BRSE 0 50 100 150 200 250 DEFLECT IONS (M I LI METERS ). WD R Es =0 25Ec D FIGURE 30 79 .+ ~ . & ~ > 61 He • >a::: D r-.• 18TH + A+ A+ A:J..b+ 4. 12TH + th .

*JZ2 + 4:1 *a!l ~ 14TH + . 8 Es=O •25Ec FIGURE 31 80 250 .. + + ~ + A. 12TH >- Ct:: ~ p 10TH ~ • A+ + (JJ + tJh + 4J. + A A:J.TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE A -TYPE B * -CRRCKED TYPE 'B 2ND ~ BASE 0 50 100 150 200 DEFLECTIONS (MILIMETERSl DEFLECT ION PROF I LE'S FRRME 2 -CRRCKED So W. + + Jh 8TH ~ A+ • A:l+ ~ 6TH _A+ 4TH ~ ~ + ~ .20TH *~ *$ *ztz *$ *$ 18TH 16TH *JtI *$ *Jtl > ~. + A Ai.b.

20TH *JP ~.CRRCKED S~ w.h At + .!l ~ *$ > + & *$ ~ 14TH + 4:1 ** *$ 16TH + 41 *$ 18TH + th ** *$ + + ~A.25Ec FIGURE 32 81 .+ *4tA+ 6TH ~+ -+ 4TH ~ + ~ -TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE A * -TYPE B )I+- 2ND ~ -CRRCKED TYPE B BASE 0 50 100 DEFLECTIONS 150 200 250 ( MIL I METERS )~ DEFLECTION PROFILES FRRME 2 . 12TH >e::: 0 ~ *2It *$ A + *$ A + 10TH *$ if) 8TH A • + + + .. C Es=O .

DEFLECTION PROFILES FRRME 2 .CRRCKED SQ WQ D E5=0 25Ec Q FIGURE 33 82 .

DEFLECTION PROFILES FRRME 2 .CRRCKED SQ WQ E Es =0 25Ec Q FIGURE 34 83 .

+ * 200 260 320 380 440 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) PERCENTRGETOP DEFLECTION INCREMENT FOR FRRME 1 RND CRRCKED WALL COMBINRTIONS FIGURE 35 84 500 ....3 + -CRACKED TYPE R * -CRRCKED TYPE B + 24 t- £ W ~ W ~ L)' z 1 ~ w + C!:J a: t- z w L) 12 0:::: W + a.

.... w + CL 1 + * 350 410 470 530 590 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) PERCENTRGE TOP DEFLECTION INCREMENT FOR FRRME 2 AND CRRCKED WALL COMBINRTIONS FIGURE 36 85 650 ..5 + * -CRACKED TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE B " + 4 ~ :z w L: W 0::: u z . ~ .......... z w -0: + 3 + -2 u cr.

.5 t:k: . + + 1 200 260 320 380 440 SHEAR WALL LENGTH' (CENT IMETERS) · PERCENTRGES OF BRSE SHERR ON FRRME 1 FOR CHOSEN DIMENSIONS OF CRRCKED WRLL FIGURE 37 86 + 500 ... a: w :t: OJ + -TYPE A * -TYPE B 4 W ()J cc co ~ 0 * 3 ~ a: IZ w u + \. * 2 t:k: W + Q.

w :I: + -TYPE A * -TYPE B 2 (J) W (J) a: *' co lJ- 0 1 w (!) a: z * I- w u a::: w '1 + CL + 350 + + + 470 530 590 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) 410 PERCENTRGES OF BRSE SHERR ON FRRME 2 FOR CHOSEN DIMENSIONS OF CRRCKED WRLL FIGURE 38 87 650 .2 ~ a: .

1 + * -CRACKED TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE B 1 fZ W 1:: W 0::. U Z + 1-1 . 4 PERCENTRGE BASE SHERR INCREMENT FOR FRRME 1 CRRCKED ~RLL COMBINATIONS FIGURE 39 88 . ~ a: f- z W W 0:: W 0)I( + 200 260 + + + ~ 320 380 440 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) 500..

2 + * -CRACKED TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE B . " 2 - r- zLU 1: LU ~ (J z 1 + ~ ~ a: r- z LU 1 + (J ~ LU CL + 350 + 410 470 530 650 590 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) ~ PERCENTAGE BASE SHEAR INCREMENT FOR FRAME 2 CRACKED WALL COMBINATIONS FIGURE 40 89 .

-CRACKED "TYPE B 2..3.... z ·0 .*.. -CRACKED TYPE A + 2........J a: er:: ~ ~ a: z ..5 * + * CJ 0 ~ ~ lJ. SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) NATURAL PERIODS OF VIBRATION FOR CHOSEN COMBINATIONS OF FRAME 1 AND CRACKED WALLS FIGURE 41 90 ..0 + ~ + a: ~ co ..+----...5 o. > lL.------+-...J a. 200 260 320 380 440 500 ....... 0 * 1 ....0 + ~ ...---.....----..----+----.. 1 ~o .5 U lLJ + (f:J .--...0 -+----+--.

0 + -CRACKED ~ TYPE A ..r---+--. > 1...0 -' a: Ct::: ..6.:) ~ a: z 1.. + + 4...0 U lJJ if) + ""-' z 0 ....-----+o---.---+_-..0 ...* -CRACKED TYPE B 5..0 0 0 .L car + * * 3. Ct::: lJJ C- 2..---+----o---.0 + ~ a: * Ct::: co .--.. 350 410 470 530 590 650 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) NATURAL PERIODS OF VIBRATION FOR CHOSEN COMBINATIONS OF FRAME 2 AND CRACKED WALLS FIGURE 42 91 .0 o..-+------.......

260 320 380 440 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) · PERCENTAGE NATURAL PERIOD INCREMENT FOR FRAME 1 CRACKED WRLL COMBINATIONS FIGURE 43 92 500 .1 + * -CRACKED TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE B + 1 + + + ~ 200 .

....2 + * -CRACKED TYPE A -CRACKED TYPE B 2 + I- Z W L: W ~ (J z . + 1 )IE ~ + a: l- :z w I u 0:: W + 0- + IE 350 410 470· 530 590 SHEAR WALL LENGTH (CENTIMETERS) 650 ~ PERCENTAGE NATURAL PERIOD INCREMENT FOR FRAME 2 CRACKED WALL COMBINATIONS FIGURE 44 93 ..

A. N. 1979." Proceedings of the Third Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering. "SAP IV . K." Proceedings of 94 . J. Montreal. 10. L. Derecho. Canada.. Special Publication.. W. Detroit. It Proceedings of the Symposium on the Behavior of Building Systems and Building Components. A. R. New Jersey. K. J. pp. L. 2. pp.-J. and Iqbal. 4." Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Behavior of Building Systems and Building Components. A. Wilson.. S. C. 9. Englewood Cliffs. "FHA Study of Seismic· Design Cri teria for 'High-Rise Buildings. Montreal. T. 7.." Prentice-Hall. 1339. "Op timiza tion App roach for Concrete High-Rise Structures. Tennessee. "Some Problems Related to the Establishments of Earthquake Design Force Levels. "Lateral Stiffness of Steel Frame-Cracked Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall Systems·. M. Fintel... A. T. California. 5. "Effect of Wall Strength on the Dynamic Inelastic Seismic Response of Yieldings WallElastic Frame Interactive Systems. C." Earthquake Engineering Research Center (EERC). and Benuska. Berkeley. Nashville. Vanderbilt University." American Concrete Institute. ACI-SP 36. 1973. tlEarthquake Response of Steel Frame-Cracked Concrete Shear Wall Systems. an'd Iyengar. Inc •. Special Publication. R. University of California.. H. H. 8• Khan. 2.. and Bran~o.tI American Concrete Institute. 1979. 1973." A report prepared for the Technical Studies Program of .. 6.. Iqbal. 3. Canada.the Federal Housing Administration.. R.REFERENCES 1. F. Vol. Derecho. Nashville. 1974. 2. 1979. and Branco. Gallagher. S. M. . ACI-SP-36. Kostem. E. K. 1975. M. and Gosh. and Peterson.A Structural Analysis Program for Static and Dynamic Response of Linear Systems. Vanderbilt University. Vol.. IIDuctility and Energy Dissipation in Earthquake-Resistant Reinforced Concrete Structural Frames.ff Proceedings of the Third Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Detroit. "Finite Element Analysis Fundamentals. HUD TS-3. 1966. Bathe. A. 61-74. "Frames and Frame-Shear Wall Systems. and Derecho. Tennessee. Clough. Kostem. 1979. E. N.. T.

Third Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 2,
Canada, 1979.

Montrea~,

11.

Kostem;' ,c:C. N. and Green, P. S., "Interaction Between Reinforced

Concrete Frames and Brick Masonry Infill Walls,". Proceedings
of the International Symposium on the Behavior of Building
Systems and Building Components, Vanderbilt University,
Nashville, Tennessee, 1979G
12.

Kostem, -C. N. and Heckman, D. T., "Earthquake Response of
Three .Dimensional Steel Frames Stiffened by Open Tubular
ConC'rete Shear Walls," Proceedings of National Conference

on Earthquake Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford,
California, 1979G
13.

Kostem, C. N. and Heckman, D. T., "Lateral Interaction of
Three Dimensional Steel Frames and Open Tubular Reinforced
Concrete Shear Walls," Proceedings of the World Congress on
Shell and Spatial Structures, lASS, Madrid, Spain, 1979.

14.

Notch, J. M. and Kostem, C. N., "Interaction of Frame-Shear
Wall Systems Subjected to Lateral Loadings," Fritz
Engineering L~boratory Report No. 354.443, Lehigh University,
1976.

15.

Paulay, T., "Capacity Design of Earthquake Resisting Ductile
Mul t:L.~Story Reinforced Concrete Frames, If Proceedings of the
Third Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 2,
Montreal, Canada, 1979.

16. ,Popoff, A., Jr., "What Do We Need to Know About the Behavior of
Structural Concrete Shear Wall Systems," American Concrete
Institute, Special Publication, Acr':'SP-36, pp. 1-14, Detroit,
1973.
17.

Zagajeski, S. W. and Bertero, V. V., "Computer-Aided Optimum
Seismic Design of Ductile Reinforced Concrete Moment-Resisting
. Frames," Earthquake Engineering Research Center (EERC),

University of California, Berkeley, California, 1977.
18.

American Concrete Institute Standards, "Building. Code Requirements _~or Reinforced Concrete," ACI-31~-77, Detroit, 1977.

19.

Applied Technology Council,' "Tentative Provisions for the
Development of Seismic Regulations for Buildings," Publication A~C 3-06, San Francisco, California, 1978.

20.

International Conference of Building Officials, "Uniform
Build-ing Code, t1 Whittier, California, 1976.

95

APPENDIX A
APPROXIMATION. OF FUNDAMENTAL PERIODS OF VIBRATION
As

has been noted in the comparison of the natural periods of

vibration of the reinforced concrete frame-shear wall combinations
obtained via finite element analysis and Uniform Briilding Code
provisions, discrepancies were noted (Ref. 20).

Recent studies

carried out by the Applied Technology Council have 'resulted in
slightly different formula, found in the Commentary of the. Provisions based on the results obtained in the San Fernando Earthquake field recordings (Ref. 19).

For shear walled structural

systems the traditional, e.g. UBC (Ref. 20), formula is
=

0.05 hn

(Eq. A.I)

(Eq. A.2)

=

The periods obtained by the former formula will be approximately
30% less than those obtained by the latter formula.

However, one of the major difficulties, or· more precisely,
the confusion, amongst the practicing engineers has been the
96

definition of the value "D" in the implementation of the formula.
For example, for Frame 2, Type B configuration, if the shear wall
length is 6.10

ffi,

the value to be used by the practicing engineer

can vary from D = 6.10 m (shear wall only) to D
length of the building).

The effects

~f

=

24.10 m (overall

choosing the "right-or-

wro"ng ll dimension are illustrated in Table Ale>

In the establishment of Table AI, both Frame 1 and Frame 2,
with their appropriate shear walls, are considered.

In the table

T
corresponds to the period computed by the computer based
FEM

finite element

analysis~

Subheadings fI(A)tt and U(B)" indicate

the type of frame-shear wall assembly, which was

previously·d~scribed.

The approximate periods are computed using Eq. A.2.

Depending upon

Tx cor-

the choice of the length, D, three periods are computed.
responds 'to taking D as the length of the shear wall.

T

y

is

arrived at by assuming that D is equal to'the overall length of the
building.

This is similar to Type A frame-shear wall combination,

in other words, the increase in the length due to the increase in
shear·wall length for connection Type B is not incluaed.

T corz

responds to the full overall length of the building, which essen-

tially simulates Type B arrangement.
Inspection of the periods indicates that T

y

and T 'values are
z

not close enough to any of the T
FEM (A) or .TFEM (B) values',.

more, because of the inherent small variations

i~

the assumed

lengths for T and T , the variations are extremely small, as
y
~
,

expected.


T always provides an upper bound 'to T
FEM
x

97

Further-

The contents of Tahle Ai clearly indicate that further definitions. and improvements. are in order to develop a more reliable formula than those that are frequently used or tentatively proposed. 98 .

95 0.47 0.17 1.88 .49 2.0 Shear Wall Frame 2 and Shear Wall T FEM T T y T x (A) (B) z 243.76 2.27 1.28 0.98 426.70 0. -.02 0.41 3.85 2.95 0.60 3.~---~--~ 487.83 3.68 3.90 365.95 0.59 2.56 1.08 1.21 3.91 304.16 3.93 548.96 3.84 -2.80 2.95 0...68 1.51 2.TABLE Ai: FUNDAMENTAL PERIODS (IN SECONDS) BY VARIOUS ASSUMPTIONS Shear Wall Length ·. ..61 4.17 1.72 1.95 0.35 4.-.17 1.76 2.68 2.87 365.95 -.89 1.96 2.(em) Frame 1 and '-D \.49 4.76 1.90 609.89 426.26 3.72 1.76 4.64 3.88 487.17 1.17 1.20 2.67 3.72 3.14 0.06 3.

for making the resources available. 100 .ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to express their gratitud~ to the Lehigh University Computing Center .orial assistance and typing of the report. without which the research could not have -been undertaken. and to Mrs. Michele Kostem for her competent e·dit. K.