Wall design

Luis E. Garcia

Outline
Generalities
DESIGN OF
Structural wall systems
REINFORCED CONCRETE Behavior of wall systems
STRUCTURAL WALLS ACI 318-08 Requirements
by: Earthquake resistant design
Luis Enrique García
President American Concrete Institute – ACI – 2008-2009 Boundary elements
Partner Proyectos y Diseños Ltda., Consulting Engineers
Professor of Civil Engineering, Universidad de los Andes,
Bogotá, Colombia

Structural wall systems

in Latin America
Before 1910 almost everything was masonry walls
The arrival of reinforced concrete brought the use of
moment resisting frames
In the 1960s walls reappear with tunnel formwork
systems such as the French Outinord
In the 1970s Structural Masonry (USA inspired vertical
perforation block) make an appearance.
In the 1980s Box-Type formwork types appear
(Contech y Western)
Story drift restrictions in the seismic codes makes its
use more widespread
Wall vs. Column
Some Codes differentiate them based on
geometry. For example, based on section side
dimensions, slenderness ratio, etc.
In some instances by the presence on an
inflection point in the moment diagram within the
story floor height. Then it classifies as column
when present and wall when not.
In ACI 318 it is done using the vertical
reinforcement steel ratio. If it is greater than 1%
transverse ties are required as in columns.

Page1
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Wall Terminology Wall based structural systems

(very confusing)
Bearing walls
In English:
Shear walls
Structural walls
Curtain walls (a glass facade in many instances)
Core walls

In Spanish:
Muros
Muros de cortante
Muros cortina
Pantallas
Paredes estructurales
Tabiques estructurales

Wall based structural systems Wall based structural systems

Box system Dual system

Page2
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Wall based structural systems Wall based structural systems

Core systems Some core types

(a) (b) (c)

Wall based structural systems Shear-lag transfer

Actual Stresses without shear-lag
Tube systems stresses
Actual
stresses

Lateral load
direction

Only lateral load

Stresses shown

Page3
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Use of structural systems for wind as the

dominant lateral load Coupled walls
No. stories

75

65

55
50

35

20

FRAME SHEAR WALLS DUAL EXTERNAL TUBE IN MODULAR

TUBE TUBE TUBE

Behavior of coupled walls Tunnel forms system

There is ample experimental evidence that the slab-walls joint reinforced

(a) (b) (c) with welded wire reinforcement fails when subjected to cyclic moment
Demands In the nonlinear range. This means that this system requires
Walls in both direction in plan.

Page4
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Effective flange
General behavior of wall systems ⎧A 4
⎪
b ≤ min.of ⎨16 ⋅ h f + b w
b ⎪s + b
hf ⎩ w

Building configuration in plan

Building configuration in height bw s

Type of foundation hf b ⎧A 12 + b w
⎪
b ≤ min.of ⎨6 ⋅ h f + b w
⎪
⎩s 2 + b w

Amount of wall with respect to s bw

floor area bf
b ⎧4 ⋅ b w
b ≤ min.of ⎨
bw ⎩b f

Wall section shape

hf ≥ hf
2

bw

Moment frame vs. wall system Fixed base vs. flexible foundation
2m

3m

3m

Wall 3m

3m

3m

3m
Rocking
Stiffness
10 m 9m 9m

Page5
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Definition of stiffness WALL BASE SHEAR

1m 1m 1.0
P1
P2
09
0.9

/ Vtotal
0.8
Infinitelly
rigid wall
0.7

wall
V
06
0.6
Flexible
fixed-base
wall 0.5
0 1 10 100 1 000 10 000 100 000
Wall ROCKING STIFFNESS / WALL STIFFNESS
Rocking
Stiffness Stiffness

LATERAL DEFLECTION - TOP OF BUILDING LATERAL DEFLECTION

WALL
1.2% 6 ROCKING
FIXED STIFFNESS
RATIO
5
ht
Deflection / Total Heigh

1 0%
1.0%
FREE
FREE 1

0.8% 4 10
100

STORY
1000

0.6% 3 2000
5000
10000
50000
0.4% 2 100000
1000000
Top D

FIXED
0.2% 1

0.0% 0
0 1 10 100 1 000 10 000 100 000 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
ROCKING STIFFNESS / WALL STIFFNESS
Lateral Deflection (m)

Page6
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

STORY DRIFT WALL

Structural system combination
ROCKING
6 STIFFNESS
RATIO

5
FREE
1
Wall frame combination existing in all
Wall-frame
10
100
height of the building
4 1000
Wall-frame combination when one system
STORY

FIXED 2000
FREE

3
5000
10000 is suspended in height
50000
100000 Frame in one direction and wall in other
1000000
2
FIXED direction in plan
1 Combination of structural materials
0.00% 0.05% 0.10% 0.15% 0.20% 0.25%
STORY DRIFT (%h)

Reinforced concrete
Bearing wall system
Reinforced masonry

Gravity loads
VERTICALES Lateral forces
HORIZONTALES
Structural steel

= +
Wood

Structural materials

Page7
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Frame system Moment frame system

(a)
ƒNon-moment resisting
frame for gravity loads
Moment resisting frame supports gravity loads and
= + lateral forces
ƒLateral forces carried
by walls or bracing

(b) Gravity loads Lateral forces

CARGAS
ƒMoment resisting frame Gravity loads
VERTICALES
Lateral forces
FUERZAS
HORIZONTALES
for gravity loads and
lateral forces
= +
ƒWalls resist tributary
gravity loads and help = +
resist lateral forces
ƒNot enough walls to
meet Dual requirements

Dual system Dual system

Combination of moment resisting frame plus walls
such that: Lateral
(a) Frame supports majority of gravity loads. forces

(b) Both frame and walls resist lateral loads. Floor

diaphragm
(c) Frame must resist at least 25% of base shear. Structural wall
(d) Wall must resist at least 75% of base shear.

Lateral forces
Gravity loads

=
+ Lateral force resistance:
75 % walls
25 % frame

Page8
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Inertial forces are transmitted to the vertical When vertical elements stiffness contribution to lateral
lateral force resisting element through the stiffness is not uniformly distributed in plan torsion of
the whole structure arises
diaphragm Story lateral forces are
Column shear force distributed by diaphragm to
llateral
t l lload
d resisting
i ti
from upper stories
elements in proportion to their
stiffness

= Fx = Fx

The diaphragm transmit s

floor inertial forces to
Accumulate column vertical elements and Accumulate column
shear force (upper distributes shear from shear force (upper stories
stories plus this story upper stories plus this story

If the diaphragm is considered rigid in its own plane

inertial floor lateral forces can be considered to act
at the center of mass of the diaphragm.
The structure rotates with respect to the stiffness Torsion of
centroid the structure
Stiffness
as a whole
centroid

Fx
Mass
centroid

Page9
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

The soft story problem – Two cases Olive View Hospital

Abrupt change
in stiffness

Page10
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Page11
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Imperial County Services Building

Page12
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Fachada Oeste Fachada Este

Planta Primer Piso West facade East facade
Street level plan

Fachada Norte
Planta Piso Típico North facade
Typical floor plan

Page13
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Page14
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Wall Area Ratio (p) Definition The Chilean formula

H
h

t
D

D
section area of walls acting in x direction
px =
floor area

Theoretical relationship between p and story drift

Defining parameters (Moderate seismic risk)
2.0
⎛h ⎞ wi ⋅ g 1.8
Δ = 50Aa g ⎜ w ⎟
⎝ A w ⎠ E ⋅ p ⋅ hp
H/D = 7
1.6
H/D = 6
1.4 H/D = 5
Where:
Story 1.2 H/D = 4
Δ = Story drift as % of hp deriva H/D = 3
Drift 1.0
Aa = PGA (Peak Ground Acceleration) as a fraction of g (%h) H/D = 2
hw = Wall height from base to top, m (%hp) 0.8 H/D = 1
Aw = Horizontal wall length,
g m 0.6
wi = Average building dead load per unit area, kN/m2 0.4
g = Acceleration of gravity, m/s2 0.2
E = Modulus of elasticity of wall concrete, kN/m2 0.0
p = Wall area ratio 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
hp = Story height (typical), m p = área
p = total walltotal
areadeinmuros / área
dir. x or del piso
y / story (%)
area (%)

Page15
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Page16
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Page17
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Some cases of wall

structures designed
using the Bogota
Seismic Microzonation

Bogota Seismic Microzonation spectra

0.8
Zona 2 - Piedemonte
0.7
Zona 3 - Lacustre A

06
0.6
Zona 4 - Lacustre B

0.5
Zona 5 - Terrazas y Conos
Sa
0.4
(g)

0.3
Zona 1 - Cerros
0.2

0.1

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
T (s)

Page18
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

The cases Building location

N
Zona 4
26 buildings with a total area of 243 000 m2 6 buildings in
Z
Zone 1
„ 19 apartment buildings Zona 1 0 2 4 6 8
Escala
10 km

4 buildings in Zona 2
„ 5 office buildings the transition
„ 2 educational buildings from Zone 1
to 2 Zona 3 Zona 1 - Cerros

Height from 7 to 20 stories 2 buildings in

Zona 2 - Piedemonte
Zona 3 - Lacustre A
Zona 4 - Lacustre B
„ 12 stories in average Zone 2 Zona 5B Zona 5A - Terrazas y Conos
Zona 5B - Terrazas y Conos
12 buildings Zona 5A
Building area from 1 200 to 50 000 m2
Potencialmente Licuables

in Zone 3
„ 9 400 m2 in average 2 buildings in
Zone 4

Lets look at the following parameter Vibration period T (s)

1.50

Fundamental building vibration period computed 1.25

using Rayleigh
Rayleigh’s
s method

Período Dirección y (s)

Relationship between building period and number 1.00
Zona 1
of stories Trans 1-2
0.75 Zona 2
Roof lateral deflection as a % of building height Zona 3
Zona 4
Structural wall area as a function of floor area 0.50
Base shear strength
g from collapse
p mechanisms
0.25
Capacity/demand ratio for horizontal seismic
forces
0.00
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50
Período Dirección x (s)

Page19
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Roof lateral deflection δn as % of hn

Estimated fundamental period
1.0
30

erage)
25 0.8

Deflexión Cubierta Y (%hn)

= 1.55 (ave
20
Zona 1 0.6 Zona 1
# pisos/Ty

Mean = 16 Trans 1-2 Trans 1-2

Zona 2 Mean = 0.47% Zona 2
15
Zona 3 Zona 3

Maximum story drift

Zona 4
0.4 Zona 4

n drift
10
SEAOC

Mean
D
0.2
T=N/10
5
Mean = 14 Mean = 0.63%
0.0
0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Deflexión Cubierta X (%hn)
# pisos/Tx

p = Structural wall area / floor area Base shear strength Vn (%W)

5.0
60
Mean = 0.72%
piso

4.0 50

W)
Corrte Basal Resistente Y (%W
Área muros direcc. Y/Área del p

40
Zona 1 Zona 1
3.0
Trans 1-2 Trans 1-2
Zona 2 Zona 2
30
Zona 3 Zona 3
2.0 Zona 4 Mean = 21% Zona 4
20
Mean = 1.23%
1.0 10

Mean = 20%
0
0.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 Corte Basal Resistente X (%W)
Área muros direcc. X/Área del piso

Page20
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

8
Capacity/Demand Effect of the wall section
7
Compression ρt = 0.01

ment
Tension
ρt = 0.0025

Mom
6

Mean = 2.0 Compression

5 Zona 1 Compression
Vny/(SayW)

Trans 1-2 Tension

Zona 2 Tension
4
Zona 3
Zona 4
3
Mean = 2.2
2 Compression
Compression

1 Compression Tension Tension

Tension
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Curvature
Vnx/(SaxW)

Experimental behavior of low

Typical wall failure modes walls under horizontal load

Flexure
„ Steel fails in tension Based on 143 low wall tests
„ Concrete spalls in the compression zone All loaded statically
„ Lateral buckling in the compression zone All failed in shear
Shear Distributed horizontal and vertical
„ Diagonal tension reinforcement ((no boundary y elements))
„ Sliding Vertical steel ratio between 0.0007 and 0.0290
„ Web buckling
Horizontal steel ratio between 0.007 and 0.0190
General buckling

Page21
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Experimental behavior of low Experimental behavior of slender

walls under horizontal load walls under horizontal load
Walls resisted shear stresses of the order of
Based on tests of 27 slender walls
1 All of them had boundary elements
f′
2 c
(MPa) = 1.6 fc′ (kgf/cm2)
Vertical steel ratios between
0.0025 and 0.0083
independently of the amount of shear
Horizontal steel ratios between
reinforcement.
0.0031 and 0.0138
Boundary element vertical steel
The upper limit of shear strength is of the order ratios between 0.011 and 0.063
High and low axial loads
of 5
fc′ (MPa) = 2.7 fc′ (kgf/cm2)
6

Experimental behavior of slender walls Experimental behavior of slender walls

under horizontal load under horizontal load
All walls that failed in shear resisted a shear
Ductility of walls that failed in shear was lower
stress g
greater than
that for those failing in flexure,
flexure although both
showed some amount of ductility. 1
f′ (MPa) = 0.53 fc′ (kgf/cm2)
6 c
Capacity to reach a large story drift is insensitive
to failure mode All walls that failed in flexure resisted horizontal
„ Story drift from 1.7% to 3.9% for flexural failures
forces that lead to shear stresses greater than
„ Story drift from 1.1% to 3.6% for shear failures
1
In all cases walls reached a 1% story drift without
f′
6 c (MPa) = 0.53 fc′ (kgf/cm2)
showing distress

Page22
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Experimental behavior of slender walls

under horizontal load Structural analysis of wall systems
Boundary elements improve the energy
dissipation capacity in the nonlinear range of Diaphragm effect
walls failing in flexure. B effect
Box ff t
Effective flange of T or C shaped sections
Boundary elements do not improve behavior for Rigid zone effect for coupling beams
walls failing in shear. Shear deformations
Warping of section due to general torsion
The deformation capacity is better when the Soil-structure interaction
horizontal steel ratio is lower. Global slenderness effects
Effect of the nonlinear response
The strength for horizontal loads decreases as
more cycles in the nonlinear range are performed.

Finite elements Finite elements

y y
P v4 v3
a a
u3 y
u4 v4 v3
4 3 b
a a
u3
x x u4
4 3 b
b
u1 1 2 x
u2 b
P v1 v2 u1 1 2
u2
(a) (b) v1
(a)
v2

y
v4 v3
a a
u3
θ1 θ2 u4
4 3 b
x

b
M1 M 1 M2 M2 u1 1 2
u2
v1 v2
(c) (b)

(c) (d)

Page23
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Wall requirements in ACI 318-08

Chapter
p 10 – Flexure and axial load

ACI 318-08 Chapter 11 - Shear

Chapter 14 - Walls

Chapter 21 – Seismic requirements

General requirements Minimum steel ratio

Cover 14.3.2 – Minimum steel ratio of vertical reinforcement ρA
20 mm computed over gross section is:
0 0012 for
„ 0.0012 f deformed
f bars not larger than Nºº 5 (5/8”)
( / ) ó 16M (16
(
mm), with fy not less than 420 MPa.
„ 0.0015 for other deformed bars.
„ 0.0012 for welded wire reinforcement with diameter not larger
than16 mm.
s h
Maximum bar spacing s 14.3.3 - Minimum ratio of horizontal reinforcement area to
s gross concrete area, ρt:
s
„ 0.0020 for deformed bars not larger than Nº 5 (5/8”) ó 16M (16
s ≤ 3h mm), with fy not less than 420 MPa.
s ≤ 450 mm
„ 0.0025 for other deformed bars.
„ 0.0020 for welded wire reinforcement with diameter not larger
s
than16 mm.
s

Page24
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Difference between wall 14.5 — Empirical design method

and column
Walls of solid rectangular cross section may be
designed by the empirical provisions if the resultant
14.3.6 – Vertical reinforcement need of all factored loads is located within the middle
not be enclosed by lateral ties if third of the overall thickness of the wall..
vertical reinforcement area is not
Pu
greater than 0.01 times gross e Pu
Mu
concrete area,
area or where vertical
reinforcement is not required as
compression reinforcement.
Aw/3 Aw/3 Aw/3

14.5 — Empirical design method 14.5 — Empirical design method

14.5.2 - Design axial strength φPn of a wall satisfying
limitations of 14.5.1 shall be computed by Eq. (14-1) 14.5.3 — Minimum thickness of walls designed by
unless designed in accordance with 14.4..
14 4 empirical design method

⎡ ⎛ kA ⎞ 2 ⎤
φPnw = 0.55φf ′A g ⎢1 − ⎜ c ⎟ ⎥ (14-1) 14.5.3.1 — Thickness of bearing walls shall not be
⎢⎣ ⎝ 32h ⎠ ⎥⎦ less than 1/25 the supported height or length,
whichever is shorter, nor less than 100 mm.
where φ shall correspond to compression-controlled
ti
sections andd the
th factor
f t foe
f effective
ff ti length
l th k is:
i 14.5.3.2 — Thickness of exterior basement walls and
(a) k = 0.8 restrained against rotation at one or both ends, foundation walls shall not be less than 190 mm.
(b) k = 1.0 unrestrained against rotation at both ends.
For walls not braced against lateral translation k = 2.0

Page25
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

TABLE R1.1.9.1 — CORRELATION BETWEEN SEISMIC-

RELATED TERMINOLOGY IN MODEL CODES
Chapter 21
Earthquake-resistant structures
Level of seismic risk or assigned seismic
Code, standard, or resource
performance or design categories as
document and edition
defined in the Code

ACI 318-08; IBC 2000, 2003; 2006;

NFPA 5000, 2003, 2006; ASCE 7- SCD* SCS SCD
z Chapter 21 was reorganized in function of 98, 7-02, 7-05; NEHRP 1997, 2000,
2003
A, B C D, E, F

Seismic Design Categories (SDC) A, B, C,

and D, E, and F in incremental order from BOCA National Building Code
ordinary to special: 1993, 1996, 1999; Standard
Building Code 1994, 1997, 1999;
SPC† SPC SPC
A, B C D; E
ASCE 7-93,
7 93, 7-95;
7 95; NEHRP 1991,
1994
A → B → C → D, E, F
Uniform Building Code 1991, Seismic Zone Seismic Zone Seismic Zone
1994, 1997 0, 1 2 3, 4

*SDC = Seismic Design Category as defined in code, standard, or resource document.

†SPC = Seismic Performance Category as defined in code, standard, or resource document

102

Seismic Design Category and ACI 318-08 – Chapter 21

Energy Dissipation Capacity Earthquake-resistant structures
Content
SDC Denomination
Must comply with in
21.1 – General requirements
S i i Design
Seismic D i (E
(Energy di
dissipation
i ti 21.2 – Ordinary moment frames B
ACI 318-08
Category capacity) 21.3 – Intermediate moment frames
21.4 – Intermediate precast structural walls C
A Chapters 1 to 19 and 22 21.5 – Flexural members of special moment frames
21.6 – Special moment frame members subjected to bending and
Ordinary axial load
B Chapters 1 to 19, 22,
and 21.2
21.7 – Joints of special moment frames D
21.8 – Special moment frames constructed using precast concrete
Chapters 1 to 19, 22, 21.9 – Special structural walls and coupling beams E
C Intermediate and 21.3 y 21.4 21.10 – Special structural walls constructed using precast concrete
21.11 – Structural diaphragms and trusses F
Chapters 1 to 19, 22, 21.12 – Foundations
D, E, F Special And 21.5 to 21.13 21.13 – Members not designated as part of the seismic-force-
resisting system

Page26
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

TABLE R21.1.1 — SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 21 TO BE SATISFIED IN TYPICAL APPLICATIONS

21.1 – General requirements Component resisting

earthquake effect,
Seismic Design Category (SDC)

unless A B C D
Scope otherwise noted (none) (21.1.1.4) (21.1.1.5) (21.1.1.6)

Analysis and design

21.1.2 21.1.2 21.1.2, 21.1.3
requirements
Chapter 21 contains provisions considered to be the Materials
minimum requirements for a cast-in-place or None None 21.1.4 21.1.7

precast concrete structure capable of sustaining Frame members 21.2 21.3

21.5, 21.6,
a series of oscillations into the inelastic range of 21.7, 21.8
response without critical deterioration in Structural walls and
strength. coupling beams
None None 21.9

Precast structural walls None 21.4 21.4,† 21.10

None
Therefore, the objective
j is to provide energy
gy Structural diaphragms and
None None 21 11
21.11
di i ti capacity
dissipation it in
i the
th nonlinear
li range off trusses
response. Foundations None None 21.12
Frame members not
proportioned
None None 21.13
to resist forces induced by
earthquake motions
Anclajes None 21.1.8 21.1.8

Chapter 21- Earthquake-resistant structures 21.9 - Special structural walls and

coupling beams
Requirements for structural walls are contained
in Section 21.9 – Special
p structural walls and
coupling beams. 21 9 2 – Reinforcement
21.9.2 R i f t

This section must be met for seismic design The distributed web reinforcement ratios, ρt
categories D, E, and F within the denomination
set by NEHRP and adopted by ASCE 7. and ρA, for structural walls shall not be less
than 0.0025, except that if Vu does not exceed
For seismic design categories A, B and C it is 0.083A cv fc′ (MPa) 0 2 A cv fc′ (kgf/cm
(MP ) = 0.27A (k f/ 2),
)
considered that the requirements of Chapter 14 of ρt and ρA, may be reduced to the values
ACI are appropriate.
Given in14.3.

Page27
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

21.9 - Special structural walls and 21.9 - Special structural walls and
coupling beams coupling beams
Unless a more detailed analysis is
At least
l t two
t curtains
t i off reinforcement
i f t
performed, effective flange widths of
must be used in a wall if Vu exceeds flanged sections ( I, L, C or T) may be
supposed to extend from the face of the
0.17λ A cv fc′ (MPa) = 0.53λ A cv fc′ web a distance equal to the smaller of:

(kgf/cm2) (a) 1/2 the distance to an adjacent wall web,

and
(b) 25 percent of the total wall height.

21.9 - Special structural walls and Recommendation for pre-dimensioning

coupling beams Minimum amount of walls

Vn of structural walls shall not exceed Shear strength

( )
V
Vn = Acv αc λ fc′ + ρt f y (21-7) ∑ ( A w ⋅ bw ) ≥ 0.25iu f ′ (MPa)
bw
c

αc Slenderness

hw hw
0 25
0.25 ≤4
Aw
0.17
⎛ hw ⎞ this slenderness ratio will Aw
⎜ ⎟ lead to a maximum story Vu
1.5 2.0 ⎝ Aw ⎠ drift Δ ≤ 1% hp

Page28
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Recommendation for pre-dimensioning Coupling beams

boundary elements boundary elements
≥ hn/16
bw bw

≥ 300 mm ≥ 300 mm ≥ 300 mm ≥ 300 mm

Aw Aw

⎧150 mm
⎪
b w ≥ ⎨hn 20
⎪ A 25
⎩ w

Wall boundary elements

Boundary elements must be placed at edges and

around openings when inelastic response is
expected.
t d ACI 318
318-08
08 gives
i ttwo alternatives
lt ti to
t
define if boundary elements are needed:
1) Section 21.9.6.2 presents a displacement-based
procedure. Boundary elements are needed or
not depending on the compressive strain at the
edge of wall caused by the seismic lateral
d fl ti
deflection, or
2) Section 21.9.6.3 requires boundary elements
when the compressive stress at the edge of wall
caused by the seismic forces exceeds a
threshold value.

Page29
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Displacement-based boundary element Displacement-based boundary element

procedure in ACI 318 (21.9.6.2)
procedure in ACI 318 (21.9.6.2)
The wall should have a single critical section
This procedure is based on the compressive under flexure and axial load at the base of the
strain demand at edges of wall when the wall is
deformed under the maximum expected lateral wall.
displacement caused by the design earthquake The zones of the wall in compression must be
ground motion. provided with specially reinforced boundary
Section 21.9.6.2 is based on the assumption that elements when the depth of the neutral axis at
inelastic response of the wall is dominated by nominal strength, c, is greater than:
flexural action at a critical, yielding section.
The wall should be proportioned so that the Aw δu
critical section occurs at the base of the wall and c≥ and ≥ 0.007
is applicable only to walls continuous from base ⎛δ ⎞ hw
to top of the structure.
600 ⋅ ⎜ u ⎟
⎝ hw ⎠

Nonlinear response of a wall Nonlinear response of a wall

Using Moment-area theorems it is possible to show that the
P δ lateral deflection caused by curvature up to yield (green
zone) is: b

A
θp and the additional deflection caused by nonlinear
rotation (orange zone) is:

Ap Plastification Ap
length Total lateral deflection is then:
φ a
0 0
Wall Mu My Mcr φu φy φcr (φu− φy) φy
section Moment Curvature φu

Page30
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Nonlinear wall deflection Moment-curvature diagram for wall section

Curvature Deflection Nonlinear Nonlinear
Aw at yield at yield curvature deflection M Ultimate curvature
δy (δu−δy) demand
Mn

hw

Ap θp
φy (φu − φy)
The total deflection is: Mcr

0 φ
We can solve for the ultimate curvature φcr φy φn φu
demand and obtain:

What happens at section? Equation (21-8) deduction

The rotation at the plastic hinge when the displacement
demand (δu) takes place is:
At level of εcu
displacement
demand φu
Strain

At level of With a plastic hinge length equal to half the wall horizontal
εc = 0.003 length:
nominal
εs > εy φn
strength c
φy εc < 0.003
At level of εs = εy
yield in
cy
Then the curvature at the wall base when the displacement
tension of
h demand occurs is:
extreme
reinforcement
Aw

Page31
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Equation (21-8) deduction Equation (21-8) deduction

The concrete strain at the extreme fiber in compression If a 600 value parameter is used instead of 666 in last equation
at ultimate is: and it is solved for εcu a value of εcu = 0.0033 is obtained, which
in turn leads to the following equation:

We can then obtain the strain at ultimate for the

displacement demand:

and If the maximum strain at the extreme compression fiber exceeds

εcu = 0.0033 then the value of c obtained from last equation
would be exceeded.
exceeded Thus the form ACI 318 presents it:
The value of c for a ultimate strain of εcu = 0.003 is:
If c is greater than the value obtained
boundary elements must be placed
along the length where it is exceeded and
a little more.

Need for boundary elements Boundary elements

If equation (21-8) indicates that the value of c is
exceeded,
d d this
thi is
i a symptom
t that
th t strains
t i Mn
greater than εcu = 0.0033 must be expected and εcu
the need to confine the edge of the wall is εs 0.003
warranted in order to prevent spalling of the
concrete there. c
Region where
In that case ACI 318 prescribes the same type boundary
and amount of confining transverse elements must
be provided
reinforcement that for columns.

Page32
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

Stress-based boundary element procedure Stress-based boundary element

in ACI 318 (21.9.6.3) procedure in ACI 318 (21.9.6.3)
Los elementos de borde deben existir desde la sección Boundary elements must be provided at edges
crítica hacia arriba por una distancia no menor que la and around openings
p g of walls when the maximum
mayor de Aw o Mu/(4Vu). stress at the extreme fiber in compression
Este procedimiento intrínsecamente está solicitando
caused by factored loads that include seismic
elementos de borde cuando las deformaciones unitarias
effects exceeds 0.2 fc′ unless that whole wall is
confined as a column.
de compresión en la fibra de máxima compresión del
muro exceden 0.003
Pu M u ⋅ A w
La evaluación se realiza para el muro actuando bajo los fcu = + > 0.2 ⋅ fc′
desplazamientos
p inelásticos del sismo de diseño. Ag Iw ⋅ 2
El valor de δu corresponde al desplazamiento inelástico
de la parte superior del muro The boundary elements can be discontinued
when the compression stress is less than 0.15 fc′

Stress-based Old (pre-1999) procedure

boundary element
procedure in ACI 318
p Aw
Pu Boundary elements
(21.9.6.3) Mu resisting all flexural
heb
Pu Mu Pu Mu effect that include
Ptu = − ≤0 Pcu = +
Ag ( A w − 300 mm ) 2 ( A w − 300 mm )
seismic forces Pu
This procedure had been part of ACI 318 since the
Mu
1971 version
version. Pu Mu
P Mu Pcu = +
Ptu = u − ≤0
In the 1999 version of 318 a modification was A g ( A w − heb ) 2 ( A w − heb )
introduced in which the need to resist all flexural
φ ⋅ P0n = φ ⋅ [0.85 ⋅ fc′ ⋅ (A g − Ast ) + A st ⋅ f y ]
forces from seismic effects with just the boundary φ ⋅ Ptn = φ ⋅ A st ⋅ f y
elements was suppressed. φ ⋅ Pn(max) ≤ 0.80 ⋅ φ ⋅ P0n

Page33
Wall design
Luis E. Garcia

The End

Page34