You are on page 1of 10

Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648

DOI 10.1007/s13369-012-0482-0

TECHNICAL NOTE - CIVIL ENGINEERING

Assessment of Shear Wall Quantity in Seismic-Resistant


Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings
Ahmet Tuken Nadeem A. Siddiqui

Received: 7 October 2011 / Accepted: 22 January 2012 / Published online: 12 December 2012
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals 2012

Abstract It is common to design reinforced concrete build-


ings with shear walls to resist seismic loads. In the present
study, an easy to apply analytical method has been proposed
to determine the amount of shear walls necessary to make
reinforced concrete buildings seismic-resistant against mod-
erate to severe earthquakes. The method is based on the fol-
lowing design strategy: (1) The total design base shear must
be resisted by shear walls; (2) Equal amounts of shear walls
must be placed in both orthogonal directions of the struc-
ture; and (3) The moment resisting frame elements, which
are beams and columns, must independently be able to resist
25 % of the total design base shear. For such a system, the
ratio of the total area of shear walls to the area of the floor
plan has been obtained by equating the total design base
shear to the total shear resistance provided by all shear walls
in one direction. Because seismic action may occur in any
direction, equal amount of shear walls is recommended to
provide in the two orthogonal directions. A procedure is also
presented to check the stiffness (or storey drift) requirement
for the determined amount of shear walls. The complete ana-
lytical procedure was demonstrated by implementing it on a
10 storey 3-D reinforced concrete building.

Keywords Shear wall Earthquake Storey drift


Dual system

1 Introduction

To be able to resist a major earthquake, a reinforced concrete


(RC) building must possess adequate strength, stiffness and
ductility. These three requirements are generally satisfied by
properly placing the required amount of shear walls in RC
A. Tuken N. A. Siddiqui (B)
buildings. Observations and evaluations of past earthquake
Department of Civil Engineering, King Saud University,
Riyadh 11421, Saudi Arabia damages show that buildings with shear walls, despite inade-
e-mail: nadeem@KSU.EDU.SA quate amount and poor placement in the building plan, resist

123
2640 Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648

the seismic forces efficiently and generally do not collapse having relatively stiff perimeter shear walls. Various degrees
under moderate to severe earthquakes. It is due to the reason of diaphragm flexibility, shear wall flexural over-strength and
that almost all the seismic codes recommend the employment numbers of stories were considered in the inelastic dynamic
of shear walls in RC buildings. In the recent past, substantial analyses. The results confirmed that current code provisions
research has been carried out on seismic response of RC consistently underestimate diaphragm forces at the upper and
buildings with shear walls. lower floors under common conditions.
Kim et al. [1] proposed an efficient method for a three- Lee and Ko [6] studied three 1:12 scaled 17-storey RC
dimensional analysis of a high-rise building structure with wall building models having different types of irregularity
shear walls. Three-dimensional super elements for walls and at the bottom two stories after subjecting to the simulated
floor slabs were developed and a substructure was formed by earthquake excitations to observe their seismic response
assembling the super elements to reduce the time required characteristics. The first model had a symmetrical moment-
for the modeling and analysis. Static and dynamic analyses resisting frame (Model 1), the second had an infilled shear
of example structures with various types of opening were wall in the central frame (Model 2), and the third had an in-
performed to verify the efficiency and accuracy of the pro- filled shear wall in only one of the exterior frames (Model
posed method. They concluded that the proposed method is 3) at the bottom two stories. Based on the test results, which
very useful for an efficient and accurate analysis of high-rise were analyzed and compared, the following conclusions were
building structures with significantly reduced computational drawn:
time and memory. (1) The estimated fundamental periods for other structures
Aksogan et al. [2] studied the forced vibration analysis of a than moment frames and bearing wall structures in UBC 97
multi-bay coupled shear wall on an elastic foundation. Their and AIK 2000 appear to be reasonable, (2) The total amounts
analysis considers shear walls with a finite number of stiff- of energy absorption by damage are similar regardless of the
ening beams, the properties of which vary from span to span existence and location of the infilled shear wall, (3) The larg-
and/or from section to section in the vertical direction. They est energy absorption is due to overturning, followed by that
employed continuous connection method (CCM) to find the due to shear deformation and (4) The rigid upper system ren-
structure stiffness matrix. The structure mass matrix was ders rocking behavior in the lower frame, and thereby the self
found with the lumped mass assumption. A time-history anal- weight contributes up to about 23 % of the resistance against
ysis was carried out using the Newmark numerical integra- the total overturning moment.
tion method to obtain the response. The response obtained by Kara and Dundar [7] presented an iterative analytical
the present method was then compared with those obtained procedure to study the effect of concrete cracking on the stiff-
using SAP2000 structural analysis program. They found a ness and deflection of shear walls. They developed a com-
good match between the results of present method and the puter program for the mentioned study. In the program, the
results of the SAP2000 program. variation of the flexural stiffness of a cracked member was
Chai and Kunnath [3] outlined a methodology for assess- evaluated by ACI and probability-based effective stiffness
ing the minimum wall thickness to ensure that the in-plane models. In the analysis, shear deformation which can be large
lateral strength was fully developed. The results were pre- and significant after development of cracks was also taken
sented for a number of parameters including the ground into account and the variation of shear stiffness in the cracked
motion intensity, longitudinal reinforcement ratio, floor regions of members was also considered using effective shear
weight, wall-to-floor area ratio and number of stories. The stiffness model available in the literature. Verification of the
minimum wall thickness was compared with recommenda- proposed procedure was confirmed with series of reinforced
tions in current building codes. concrete shear wall tests available in the literature as well.
Kim and Lee [4] proposed an efficient analysis method Comparison between the analytical and experimental results
that can be used regardless of the number, size and loca- showed that the proposed analytical procedure can provide
tion of openings. The analysis method uses super elements an accurate and efficient prediction of both the deflection
developed by the matrix condensation technique. Static and and flexural stiffness reduction of shear walls with different
dynamic analyses of example structures having various types height to width ratio and vertical load. The results of the ana-
of openings were performed to verify the efficiency and accu- lytical procedure also indicated that the percentage of shear
racy of the proposed method. The results demonstrated that deflection in the total deflection increases with decreasing
the proposed method can be used for the analysis of a shear height to width ratio of the shear wall.
wall structure with openings. Outstanding accuracy in analy- Marini and Meda [8] presented a new technique for the
sis was achieved with drastically reduced computational time strengthening of existing R/C shear walls based on the appli-
and memory. cation of thin high performance jackets. The strengthening
Lee et al. [5] investigated the amplification of forces and jacket was made of high performance concrete, having a com-
displacements in flexible diaphragms for low-rise structures pression resistance higher than 150 MPa, and reinforced by

123
Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648 2641

means of a high strength steel mesh. The experimental study boundary between economically repairable minor damage
was carried out on a 1:3 scale-R/C wall, proportioned to resist and damage that is not worth repairing. The intensity of
vertical loads only, and reinforced by means of a 15 mm ground shaking associated with this limit state has a low prob-
thick-high performance jacket. Cyclic loads of increasing ability of occurrence during the expected life of the building.
magnitude were applied to the experimental shear wall up In the event of a ground shaking, the most important desired
to collapse. The effectiveness of the technique was also ver- property is the strength of the building, especially when its
ified numerically. The results showed the efficiency of the elastic limit is attained or slightly exceeded. A building can be
proposed solution on the significantly increasing structure avoided to reach the limit state by providing adequate shear
resistance, deformation capacity and ductility. walls in the orthogonal directions. Keeping this requirement
Mo et al. [9] presented a study which accomplishes three in view, in the present study, effort has been made to deter-
main tasks: (1) formulating the Cyclic Softened Membrane mine that amount of shear walls, which is necessary to make
Model (CSMM) for the development of a finite element pro- a building safe against excessive damage. For this purpose,
gram, (2) implementing the formulated CSMM into a finite the following assumptions (or design strategy) were made.
element program SCS (Simulation of Concrete Structures)
using OpenSees that stands for Open System for Earthquake The total design base shear is resisted by shear walls;
Engineering Simulation as a framework, (3) validating the Equal amounts of shear walls are available in the orthog-
finite element program SCS by comparing its predictions onal directions of the structure because seismic action
with the experimental results of RC framed shear walls avail- may occur in both directions;
able in the literature. The moment resisting frame elements, which are beams
Tuken [10] proposed an analytical method to determine and columns, independently resist 25 % of the total
the sway of a mixed structure (frame + shear wall) subject design base shear.
to seismic forces. The validity of the analytical method was
tested on 3-D buildings of different heights. He also obtained The Uniform Building Code (UBC)-1997 [12] defines the
the sway response using SAP2000 and found that the sway structure that possesses the above-mentioned three proper-
results obtained by the analytical method matches well with ties as the dual system.
the results of SAP2000. In a similar study, Tuken and Atim- In the present study, the amount of required shear walls in
tay [11] proposed an analytical method to determine the sway one direction was obtained by satisfying the strength crite-
of a totally framed building subject to seismic forces. The rion that is obtained by equating the total design base shear
implementation of the proposed method to framed buildings (Vt ) to the total shear resistance (Vr ) provided by all the shear
in regions of high seismic risk was emphasized. walls in one direction. That is
A detailed review on different aspects of typical frame
structures containing shear walls shows that simplified pro- Vt = Vr (1)
cedures for the assessment of shear wall quantity that can
resist the earthquake forces safely and can also satisfy the two The total design base shear, Vt , can be estimated using an
major requirements of the seismic codes (strength and stiff- acceleration response spectrum. In the present study, the
ness) are not widely available. Keeping this scope in view, in acceleration response spectrum defined by UBC-1997 [12],
the present study, an easy to apply analytical method has been was employed. This spectrum is shown in Fig. 1.
proposed to determine the amount of shear walls necessary to
make reinforced concrete buildings seismic-resistant against
moderate to severe earthquakes. The amount of shear walls
2.5Ca Control Periods
obtained was checked to fulfill the two requirements (i.e.
Spectral Acceleration (gs)

Ts= Cv /2.5Ca
adequate strength and adequate stiffness) of seismic design. To=0.2Ts
The third requirement, ductility, was not presented here as
ductility requirement can easily be satisfied with the same
quantity of shear walls by proper detailing and satisfying the Cv/T
minimum requirements of the seismic codes.
Ca

2 Problem Formulation

Under maximum probable earthquake, some repairable dam- To Ts


Period (Seconds)
age to the contents of buildings is acceptable. Therefore,
a damage control limit state is to be defined to mark the Fig. 1 Acceleration response spectrum (UBC-97 [12])

123
2642 Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648

The above acceleration response spectrum reveals that the web; f y is the yield strength of longitudinal reinforcement
effective ground acceleration is magnified by a factor of 2.5, (in MPa).
for natural periods of 0.21.0 s. These natural periods are Equating the Eqs. (5) and (6), the ratio of the total area of
the most typical values of building structures generally exist shear walls to the area of the floor plan can be obtained as
in practice. Based on this observation, the total design base 
Asw S(T )A0 I nwi
shear, Vt , can be estimated by the equation provided by UBC- =  103 , (7)
1997 [12]. This equation is given by Ap 
R(0.166 f c + sh f y )
S(T )A0 I W
Vt = , (2) 
where wi is in kN/m2 ; f c and f y are in MPa.
R
The total area of shear walls obtained from above equa-
where S(T ) is the spectrum coefficient, which is the ratio tion (Eq. 7) must also satisfy the stiffness requirement. In
of spectral acceleration to effective peak ground accelera- other words, the stiffness provided by all shear walls should
tion, its maximum value is 2.5; A0 is the effective ground not be less than the minimum stiffness required by the codes
acceleration coefficient; I is the building importance factor; by means of storey drift limitation. In the present study the
R is the seismic force reduction factor (structural behavior storey drift (i ) and relative storey drift (i / h i ) are defined
factor); and W is the total weight of building calculated by as
considering live load participation factor .
The total weight of the building can be expressed in terms i di di1
i = di di1 ; = (8)
of its floor areas and number of stories as hi hi

n
Where h i = Height of ith storey of building; di = Displace-
W = wi Api , (3) ment calculated at ith storey of building. In each earthquake
i=1
direction; the maximum value of calculated storey drifts,
where Api is the plan area of the ith floor; n is the number of (i )max , for columns and structural walls of the ith storey of a
stories; wi = gi + qi . building should not exceed the limiting value lim , generally
Here wi is the weight of ith storey of building by consid- specified by the building codes. In other words,
ering live load participation factor ; gi is the total dead load
at ith storey of building; qi is the total live load at ith storey (i )max lim . (9)
of building.
Assuming an average value of wi , and same floor-area for In the cases, where the condition specified by Eq. (9) is not
each storey, the total weight of the building can be approxi- satisfied, the lateral stiffness of the structural system should
mately expressed as: be increased.
The value of total stiffness of all shear walls =  E I =

n
total stiffness of all shear walls within a storey. Here, E is
W = wi Api = wi n Ap (4) the modulus of elasticity of building material (e.g. concrete)
i=1
and I is the moment of inertia of shear wall.
Substituting above expression for the total weight of the Let n sw be the number of shear walls to be used in each
building in Eq. (2), we get direction and taking bw = bmin. Here bmin is the minimum
width of shear wall required by the code. We may write,
S(T )A0 I wi n Ap
Vt = (kN), (5) 
R Asw
lw = (10)
where wi is in kN/m2 and Ap is in m2 . bw
Having determined the total base shear, now we need to Then assuming a typical shear wall with (lw )typical = lmin
find an expression of shear resistance Vr . According to UBC-  
1997 [12], a lower-bound value of the shear strength of the lw Asw
n sw = = (11)
total number of shear walls in one orthogonal direction can (lw )typical (Asw )typical
be obtained using the following expression: K min = (E I ) = n sw E Itypical , (12)
   
Vr = Asw 0.166 f c + sh f y 103 (k N ), (6) where Itypical = 12 1
bw lw3 = 12
1 3 ; (A )
bmin lmin sw typical =
lw bw = lmin bmin
where is the strength-reduction factor; Asw is the area of Substituting Eq. (11) into Eq. (12) we have
shear wall (in m2 ); f c is the 28-day characteristic compres-

sive strength of concrete (in MPa); sh is the ratio of hori- Asw
K min = E Itypical (13)
zontal web reinforcement of wall to the gross area of wall (Asw )typical

123
Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648 2643


Substitution of Asw from Eq. (7) into Eq. (13) yields the flexural rigidity of the structure in the horizontal plane;
v 2 = 1 + KK0 ; GA is the the shear rigidity of the frame per
E Itypical S(T )A0 I n Ap wi
K min =   103 (kN/m2 ), unit height (i.e. equivalent shear stiffness of the building).
(Asw )typical R 0.166 f c + sh f y
(14)
2.1.1 Solution Procedure

where wi is in kN/m2 , Ap is in m2 , E is in kN/m2 and f c and
f y are in MPa. Letting w = K y in Eq. 17, the differential equation of lateral
A multiplying factor (1) is introduced in the above displacement factored by K multiplier, can be obtained as
equation to increase the lateral stiffness of building having expressed in Eq. (18).
many stories (e.g. 10). This is necessary to satisfy the maxi-
mum relative storey drift value required by the seismic codes. d4 w d2 w v 2 1
Thus, Eq. (14) can be rewritten in the following form that s2 + M(x) s 2 f (x) = 0, (18)
dx 4 dx 2 v2
includes the multiplying factor .
where s 2 = K /(v 2 G A); K = K (shear walls) +  K
E Itypical S(T )A0 I n Ap wi
K min =  103 (kN/m2 ). (columns).

(Asw )typical R(0.166 f c + sh f y ) In shear wall-frame structures, since the stiffness of col-
(15) umns is negligibly small when compared to that of shear
walls,  K (columns) term can be neglected.
For those buildings which have relatively lesser number of Bending moment expression can easily be found by dif-
stories (e.g. 9), the value of multiplying factor = 1. It ferentiating the equation of w = K y twice. Therefore, the
is worth mentioning that Eq. (15) includes a multiplication degree of general differential equation of bending is reduced
factor that can be obtained easily by increasing the value of to two as expressed in Eq. (19).
K min in Eq. (14) until any seismic code requirement for max-
imum relative storey drift is satisfied. Equation (15), thus, d2 M(x) v2 1
provides the value of the total stiffness required to satisfy s2 M(x) + M0 (x) s 2 f (x) = 0. (19)
dx 2 v2
both strength and stiffness requirements of seismic design.
The solution of this differential equation can be expressed
2.1 Formulation of Shear Wall-Frame Interaction as the summation of two separate solutions, one is particular
solution and the other one is complementary solution. That
In the present study, to derive the governing equation for is
the estimation of lateral storey drift of the shear wall-frame
building under seismic excitation, a number of assumptions M(x) = M(x)complementary + M(x)particular (20)
were made as mentioned in Tuken [13].
Using these assumptions, the following governing differ-
ential equation of flexuralshear beam (i.e. shear wall-frame)
has been derived considering dynamic equilibrium of shear M(x) = A1 cosh + A2 sinh
wall-frame building.  
v2 1
d2 y (1 + s 2 D 2 ) s 2 f (x) M 0 (x) (21a)
4
d y 2
d y K M(x) v2
K 4 G A 2 + dx = f (x)
2
(16) x
dx dx K0 where = .
s
d4 y 2
2d y G A M(x) The calculation of M0 (x) in Eq. (21a) based on Fig. 2
K 4
G A v 2
+ f (x) = 0, (17)
dx dx K0 can be written as in Eqs. (21b) and (21c).
 x  (H x)2  x  (H x)2
where G is the shear modulus; K =  E I = total stiffness M0 (x) = p + p 1 (21b)
of all shear walls within the storey (since stiffness of the col- H 2 H 3
 
umns are very small compared to total stiffness of all the (H x)2 x H x
M0 (x) = p +
shear walls within that storey); f (x) is the distributed lateral H 2 3
2  
force; K ddx y2 M(x) is the moment taken by the frame; M(x) 2H 3 3H 2 x + x 3
2 =p (21c)
is the moment caused by the external loads at height x; K ddx y2 6H
2y
Kd 2 M(x)
is the moment taken by the shear walls; dx K 0 is the unit To find A1 and A2 , two boundary conditions can be applied
rotation due to axial deformations of frame columns; K 0 is as follows:

123
2644 Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648

Fig. 2 Shear wall-frame p p(x/H) p(1-x/H)


structure under triangular
distributed lateral load

(H-x) = +
x x
p(x/H) p(x/H)
1. The shear force at the base level must be equal to the 1. Moment at the top of the structure must be zero, i.e.
total lateral load, i.e. M(H ) = 0 (25b)
2. The shear force at the base level must be equal to
H
dM(0) the total lateral load, i.e.
= f (x)dx (22) 
dx dM  1
0
 = p H. (25c)
dx x=0 2
2. Moment at the top of the structure must be zero, i.e.
Applying the above two boundary conditions in order, we
obtain A1 and A2 as expressed in Eqs. (26) and (27), respec-
M(H ) = 0 (23)
tively.
Recalling w = K y, Eq. (21) must be integrated twice and    
ps 2 1
two more boundary conditions must be applied to find the A1 = 2 1+ sinh (26)
v cosh 2
equation of lateral displacement, w, as expressed in Eq. (24).  
ps 2 1
x  A2 = 2 , (27)
v 2
w= M(x)dx + A3 x + A4
2
(24)
0 where = Hs .
To find A3 and A4 , two additional boundary conditions can The lateral displacement expression can be obtained by
be applied as follows: integrating Eq. (25) twice, as expressed in Eqs. (28) and (29).

x 
1. Displacement must be zero at the base level of the struc- w(x) = M(x)dx 2 (28)
ture, i.e.
0

v 2 1
w(0) = 0 w(x) = A1 s 2 cosh + A2 s 2 sinh + M(x)dx 2
v2
s2 p x 3
2. Slope must be zero at the base level of the structure due + A3 x + A4 (29a)
v2 H 6
to the fixed base assumption, i.e. To obtain A3 and A4 , the following two boundary
dw(0) conditions can be applied.
= 0. 1. Displacement must be zero at the base level of the
dx
building, i.e.
2.1.2 Response Estimation Under Triangular Load w(0) = 0 (29b)
x 2. Slope must be zero at the base level of the building due to
For triangular distributed lateral load of f (x) = p H as
shown in Fig. 2, Eq. (21a) will take the following form. fixed base assumption, i.e.

dw 
v2 1 =0 (29c)
M(x) = A1 cosh + A2 sinh + M0 (x) dx  x=0
v2
s2 Applying the above two boundary conditions in order, we
p(k), (25a) obtain A3 and A4 as expressed in Eqs. (30) and (31), respec-
v2
x tively.
where k = .
H
To find A1 and A2 in Eq. (25) following two boundary, A3 = A2 s (30)
conditions can be applied; A4 = A1 s . 2
(31)

123
Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648 2645

Finally, the equation of lateral displacement factored by K Calculate the minimum stiffness of all shear walls (K min );
multiplier, w(x), can be written as expressed in Eq. (32) or flexural rigidity (K 0 ), due to the most exterior columns
equivalently in Eq. (33). and the shear walls that is not placed on the symmetry
axis of building; and shear rigidity (GA) of all the col-
v2 1
K y(x) = A1 s 2 cosh + A2 s 2 sinh + pH4 umns using
  v 2
 
k3 k4 k5 k2 1 k k2 k3
+ + + E Itypical S(T )A0 I (n Ap wi )
12 12 40 3 2 2 4 20 K min =    103 .

s2 p x 3 (Asw )typical R 0.166 f c + sh f y
+ A3 x + A4 (32)
v2 H 6  
1
K y(x) = A1 s 2 cosh + A2 s 2 sinh + 1 2 p H 4 K 0 is the flexural rigidity of the structure in the horizon-
v
  tal plane (i.e. Ad2 terms due to the most exterior columns
k 2 k 3 k 5 2
s pk 2 and the shear walls that is not placed on the symmetry
+ x + A3 x + A4 (33)
6 12 120 6v 2 axis of building) and

If the equation of sway, y(x), is differentiated once, the


slope distribution is obtained. If it is differentiated twice, the 12E c Ic 1
GA = . ,
curvature distribution over the shear walls is obtained. Multi- lc2 1+  2Ic
I I

lc l b1 + l b2
plying the curvature by the sum of flexural rigidities of shear b1 b2

walls, the moment distribution M(x) on the shear walls is


obtained by Eq. (34). where Ib1 is the moment of inertia of beam to the left
EI of the column considered; Ib2 is the moment of inertia
M(x) = [A1 cosh + A2 sinh of beam to the right of the column considered; E is the
K
     Modulus of elasticity of concrete; Ic is the moment of
1 1 x x3 s2 p
+ 1 2 p H 4
+ 2 x (34) inertia of column; lc is the length of column; lb1 is the
v 3H 2 2H 3 6H 5 v H
length of beam to the left of the column considered; lb2
2.2 Algorithm for the Determination of Stiffness Multiplier is the length of beam to the right of the column considered.
()
Estimate the lateral storey drifts by calculating the lateral
For any particular case, stiffness multiplier () can easily be displacement y(x) using
figured out by following the algorithm given below:
K y(x) = A1 s 2 cosh + A2 s 2 sinh
Determine the amount of total shear wall ( Asw ) using    
1 2 k3 k5
4 k
 + 1 2 pH +
Asw S(T )A0 I (nwi ) v 6 12 120
=    103
Ap  s 2 pk 2
R 0.166 f c + sh f y x + A3 x + A4
6v 2

Assume bw = bmin , which is the minimum width of shear Finally, based on the maximum relative storey drift value;
walls required by the seismic code; Calculate the total the value of that is the multiplier of K can be obtained
length of shear walls to be used in both x and y directions easily by increasing only the K value until any valid seis-
( Iw ) using mic code requirement for relative storey drift has been
 satisfied.
Asw
lw =
bw

Assume the minimum length of each shear wall being 3 Implementation and Numerical Study
lw = lmin , and calculate the total number of shear walls to
be used in both directions as To demonstrate the methodology discussed in problem for-
  mulation, a 10 storey 3-D building having a typical floor
lw Asw
n sw = = plan as shown in Fig. 3 was selected. The other salient data
(lw )typical (Asw )typical required for the analysis are presented in Table 1.

123
2646 Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648

Fig. 3 Typical floor plan of the


3-D building studied

Table 1 Data employed for the Parameter Value Remark


seismic-analysis of the 3-D
building studied Column size 600 600 mm Assumed same for all columns
Beam size 250 450 mm Assumed same for all beams
Slab thickness 120 mm Assumed same for all slabs
Storey heights 3,000 mm Assumed same for all stories
Spectrum coefficient (S(T )) 2.5 Maximum value required by
Turkish Earthquake Code [14]

Compressive strength of concrete ( f c ) 20 MPa
Yield strength of steel ( f y ) 420 MPa
Modulus of elasticity of concrete (E) 28,500,000 kN/m2
Width of shear wall (bw ) 0.25 m Minimum value required by
Turkish Earthquake Code [14]
Length of shear wall (lw ) 3.0 m Assumed minimum value
Ratio of horizontal web reinforcement of wall to 0.0025 Minimum value required by
the gross area of wall web (sh ) UBC-97 [12]
Effective Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A0 ) 0.4 For seismic zone 1
Storey weights (wi ) 7.0 kN/m2 Assumed average value for the
weight of ith storey of the
building (same value was
assumed for each storey)
Structural behavior factor (R) 7.0 For buildings in which seismic
loads are jointly resisted by
frames and solid and/or coupled
structural walls
Building importance factor (I ) 1.0 For residential and office buildings,
hotels, industrial buildings, etc.
Strength reduction factor () (for shear) 0.7 Recommended by UBC-97 [12]
for shear walls in seismic zone1

3.1 Total Area of Shear Walls Then the total area of shear walls to be used can be calcu-
lated as  Asw = 0.008(1300) = 10.4 m2 . Using bw = 0.25 m
Using Eq. (7) and the data presented in Table 1, total area of of shear walls, minimum length of total shear walls to be
shear walls to the area of the floor plan can be calculated as provided in each orthogonal directions will be = 10.4 /

Asw / Ap = 0.008; where Ap = 50 26 = 1,300 m2 (Fig. 3). 0.25 = 41.6 m.

123
Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648 2647

Fig. 4 Arrangements of shear


walls for the 3-D building
studied

For the 3-D building studied, shear walls can be placed on shear walls should not be less than the minimum stiffness
the floor plan as shown in Fig. 4. As it can be seen that the required by the codes with storey drift limitation. For the
total length of shear walls in x direction is 40 m and the total selected numerical example, the minimum value of total stiff-
length of shear walls in y direction is 38 m, which is nearly ness of all shear walls K min can be computed using Eq. 15.
equal to the length of shear walls provided in x direction. In Substituting = 1.2 for 10 storey building, and all the
Fig. 4, a symmetric placement of shear walls was preferred desired data from Table 1 we have K min = 209,664,000
to avoid the development of torsion. kN/m2 . As both the K x and K y are much greater than the
Having decided the arrangements of shear walls and tak- minimum required stiffness K min , the amount of shear walls
ing the minimum width of shear walls as bw = 0.25 m, total obtained using proposed methodology also satisfies the stiff-
stiffness of all shear walls along x and y directions can be cal- ness criteria required by the seismic codes (e.g. Turkish
culated as K x = 1,484,375,000 kN/m2 and K y = 681,625,000 Earthquake Code-1997 [14]).
kN/m2 . Under all circumstances; total stiffness of all the shear
Here, K x and K y are the lateral stiffness values provided walls, obtained from the strength requirement, is greater than
by the minimum amount of shear walls satisfying the strength the required minimum stiffness K min and hence the maxi-
requirement of seismic code. Using the minimum amount of mum relative storey drift requirement is automatically satis-
shear walls obtained from strength requirement of Vr = Vt and fied for the 10-storey building studied.
the minimum value of total stiffness of all shear walls (K min ),
stiffness requirement of seismic code was found to be auto-
matically satisfied up to 9 storey building. After that the min- 4 Conclusions
imum stiffness of total shear walls (K min ) must be increased
by a factor of to satisfy the maximum relative storey drift An easy to apply analytical method was presented to deter-
criteria (i.e. stiffness requirement) of seismic code. mine the amount of shear walls necessary to make rein-
For the selected numerical example, the minimum value of forced concrete buildings seismic-resistant against moderate
total stiffness of all shear walls K min can be computed using to severe earthquakes. The methodology was demonstrated
Eq. 15. However, to use Eq. (15), it is necessary to compute by implementing it on a 10 storey 3-D reinforced concrete
first the stiffness multiplier . The value of was determined building. For a realistic set of data, total area of shear walls
using the data shown in Table 1 and following the Algorithm for the chosen building was determined and then provided
presented in Section 2.2. The value of this multiplier comes in x and y directions. The total stiffness of all shear walls
out to be 1.2 for this implementation problem. was also determined in x and y directions. To compare the
total stiffness provided by the shear walls in two orthogo-
3.2 Checking the Stiffness Requirement nal directions; a minimum value of total stiffness, satisfying
(Storey Drift Limitation) the storey drift limitation of any seismic code (e.g. Turkish
Earthquake Code [14]), was determined using a stiffness mul-
The total area of shear walls must also satisfy the stiffness tiplier . This multiplier was obtained using the selected data
requirement. In other words, the stiffness provided by the presented in Table 1 and proposed algorithm. The value of

123
2648 Arab J Sci Eng (2013) 38:26392648

comes out to be 1.2 for this implementation problem. The 3. Chai, Y.H.; Kunnath, S.K.: Minimum thickness for ductile RC
results clearly show that the amount of shear walls obtained structural walls. Eng. Struct. 27, 10521063 (2005)
4. Kim, H.S.; Lee, D.G.: Analysis of shear wall with openings using
using proposed methodology also satisfies the storey drift super elements. Eng. Struct. 25(8), 981991 (2003)
limitation required by any seismic code (e.g. Turkish Earth- 5. Lee, H.J.; Kuchma, D.; Aschheim, M.A.: Strength-based design of
quake Code [14]). This infers that for 3-D reinforced concrete flexible diaphragms in low-rise structures subjected to earthquake
buildings, the maximum relative storey drift requirement is loading. Eng. Struct. 29(7), 12771295 (2007)
6. Lee, H.; Ko, D.: Seismic response characteristics of high-rise RC
generally satisfied as long as the minimum amount of shear wall buildings having different irregularities in lower stories. Eng.
walls, obtained from the strength requirement, is provided in Struct. 29(11), 31493167 (2007)
each orthogonal direction irrespective of the orientation of 7. Kara, I.F.; Dundar, C.: Prediction of deflection of reinforced con-
shear walls. In the cases where the maximum relative sto- crete shear walls. Adv. Eng. Softw. 40, 777785 (2009)
8. Marini, A.; Meda, A.: Retrofitting of R/C shear walls by means of
rey drift requirement is not satisfied, the amount of shear
high performance jackets. Eng. Struct. 31, 30593064 (2009)
wall should be revised (considering minimum required lat- 9. Mo, Y.L.; Zhong, J.; Hsu, T.T.C.: Seismic simulation of RC wall-
eral stiffness) to satisfy the maximum relative storey drift type structures. Eng. Struct. 30, 31673175 (2008)
requirement of relevant seismic code. 10. Tuken, A.: Analysis and assessment of seismic drift of reinforced
concrete mixed (shear wall-frame) structures. Technology 7(4),
523532 (2004)
Acknowledgments This research work presented herein was sup-
11. Tuken, A.; Atimtay, E.: Analysis and assessment of seismic drift of
ported by the Deanship of Scientific Research, Research Centre,
concrete framed structures. In: Seventh International Congress on
College of Engineering, King Saud University, Kingdom of Saudi Ara-
Advances in Civil Engineering, October 11-13, Yildiz Technical
bia through Grant No. 1/432.
University, Istanbul, Turkey (2006)
12. Uniform Building Code (UBC).: International Conference of
Building Officials (1997)
References 13. Tuken, A.: Quantifying Seismic Design Criteria for Concrete
Buildings: The Amount of Shear Walls Necessary to Satisfy Earth-
quake Code Requirements. PhD thesis, VDM Publishing, Germany
1. Kim, H.; Lee, D.; Kim, C.K.: Efficient three-dimensional seismic
(2009)
analysis of a high-rise building structure with shear walls. Eng.
14. Turkish Earthquake Code.: Specification for Structures to be Built
Struct. 27(6), 963976 (2005)
in Disaster Areas. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement, Ankara
2. Aksogan, O.; Bikce, M.; Emsen, E.; Arslan, H.M.: A simplified
(1997)
dynamic analysis of multi-bay stiffened coupled shear walls. Adv.
Eng. Softw. 38, 552560 (2007)

123