A contribution to seismic shear design of R/C walls in dual structures
The paper focuses on the seismic response of walls in dual (frame + wall) structures, with particular emphasis on shear behaviour. Although dual structures are widely used in earthquake-resistant medium-rise and high-rise buildings, the provisions of modern seismic codes regarding design of walls for shear are not fully satisfactory, particularly in the (common) case that walls of substantially different length form part of the same structure. Relevant provisions of the leading seismic codes are first summarised and their limitations discussed. Then an extensive parametric study is presented, involving two multistorey dual systems, one with identical walls, and one with walls with unequal length, designed to the provisions of Eurocode 8 for two different ductility classes (H and M). The walls of the same structures are also designed to other methods such as those used in New Zealand and Greece. The resulting different designs are then assessed by subjecting the structures to a suite of strong ground motions, carrying out inelastic time history analysis, and comparing the results against design action effects. It is found that although modern code procedures generally lead to satisfactory performance (differences among them do exist), the design of walls seems to be less appropriate in the case of unequal length walls. For this case a modified procedure is proposed, consisting of an additional factor to account for the relative contribution of walls of the same length to the total base and an improved envelope of wall shears along the height; this improved method seems to work better than the other procedures evaluated herein, but further calibration is clearly required.
KeywordsDual systems Reinforced concrete walls Eurocode 8 New Zealand Code Seismic shear Higher mode effects
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- CEN (Comité Européen de Normalisation) Techn. Comm. 250 (2004a) Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures—Part 1: general rules and rules for buildings (EN 1992–1–1:2004). CEN, Brussels, Oct. 2004Google Scholar
- CEN Techn. Comm. 250 (2004b) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings (EN 1998–1:2004). CEN, Brussels, May 2004Google Scholar
- Kappos AJ, Dymiotis C (2000) DRAIN-2000: A program for the inelastic time-history and seismic reliability analysis of 2-D structures. Report No. STR/00/CD/01, Department of Civil and Offshore Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
- Keintzel E (1990). Seismic design shear forces in reinforced concrete cantilever shear wall structures. Eur J Earthquake Eng 3(1): 7–16 Google Scholar
- Paulay T and Priestley MJN (1992). Seismic Design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. J Wiley & Sons, New York Google Scholar
- Penelis GG and Kappos AJ (1997). Earthquake-resistant Concrete Structures. E & FN SPON Chapman & Hall, London Google Scholar
- SEAOC Seismology Committee (1999). Recommended lateral force requirements and commentary. SEAOC, Sacramento, California Google Scholar
- Standards New Zealand (2006) Concrete Structures Standard: Part 1—The design of concrete structures (NZS 3101:2006); Part 2—commentary on the design of concrete structures. WellingtonGoogle Scholar
- Theodulidis N (2002) Strong motion simulation of large intermediate depth earthquakes in SE Europe. In: CD Proceedings of the 12th ECEE (London, UK), Paper no. 668Google Scholar