Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration

, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 285–296

An evaluation of force-based design vs. direct displacement-based design of jointed precast post-tensioned wall systems

Article

Abstract

The unique features of jointed post-tensioned wall systems, which include minimum structural damage and re-centering capability when subjected to earthquake lateral loads, are the result of using unbonded post-tensioning to attach the walls to the foundation, along with employing energy dissipating shear connectors between the walls. Using acceptance criteria defined in terms of inter-story drift, residual drift, and floor acceleration, this study presents a multiple-level performance-based seismic evaluation of two five-story unbonded post-tensioned jointed precast wall systems. The design and analysis of these two wall systems, established as the direct displacement-based and force-based solutions for a prototype building used in the PREcast Seismic Structural Systems (PRESSS) program, were performed at 60% scale so that the analysis model could be validated using the PRESSS test data. Both buildings satisfied the performance criteria at four levels of earthquake motions although the design base shear of the direct displacement-based jointed wall system was 50% of that demanded by the force-based design method. The study also investigated the feasibility of controlling the maximum transient inter-story drift in a jointed wall system by increasing the number of energy dissipating shear connectors between the walls but without significantly affecting its re-centering capability.

Keywords

concrete precast unbonded post-tensioning wall building code performance-based evaluation force-based design direct-displacement based design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aaleti S (2005), “Design and Analysis of Unbonded Post-tensioned Precast Wall Systems,” M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Carr AJ (2003), “RUAUMOKO Inelastic Dynamic Analysis Program,” University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.Google Scholar
  3. Collins RH (1999), “Design of a Precast Concrete Building for Seismic Loading,” Thesis of M.Sc., University of Washington, USA, 37–235.Google Scholar
  4. Conley J, Sritharan S and Priestley MJN (2002), “Precast Seismic Structural Systems PRESSS-3: The Five-Story Precast Test Building, Vol. 3-1: Wall Direction Response,” Report Number: SSRP-99/19, University of California, San Diego, California, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Galusha JG (1999), “Precast, Post-tensioned Concrete Walls Designed to Rock,” M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.Google Scholar
  6. International Building Code (IBC) (2000), International Code Council, Virginia, USA, 331–377.Google Scholar
  7. ITG 5.1-XX (2006), Acceptance Criteria for Special Unbonded Post-tensioned Structural Walls Based on Validation Testing, American Concrete Institute.Google Scholar
  8. Kurama Y, Pessiki S, Sause R and Lu L (1999a), “Lateral Load Behavior and Seismic Design of Unbonded Post-Tensioned Precast Concrete Walls,” ACI Structural Journal, 96(4): 622–632Google Scholar
  9. Kurama Y, Pessiki S, Sause, R and Lu L (1999b), “Seismic Behavior and Design of Unbonded Post-Tensioned Precast Concrete Walls,” PCI Journal, 44(3): 72–88.Google Scholar
  10. Nakaki SD, Stanton JF and Sritharan S (1999), “An Overview of the PRESSS Five-story Precast Test Building,” PCI Journal, 44(2): 26–39.Google Scholar
  11. Performance-Based Seismic Engineering Ad Hoc Subcommittee (2003), Revised Interim Guidelines: Performance-based Seismic Engineering for the SEAOC Blue Book, Structural Engineers Association of California, California, USA, 128–132.Google Scholar
  12. Priestley MJN (2002), “Direct Displacement-based Design of Precast/Prestressed Concrete Buildings,” PCI Journal, 47(6): 67–79.Google Scholar
  13. Priestley MJN, Sritharan S, Conley JR and Pampanin S (1999), “Preliminary Results and Conclusions From the PRESSS Five-Story Precast Concrete Test Building,” PCI Journal, 44(6): 42–67.Google Scholar
  14. Rahman MA and Sritharan S (2006), “A Performance-based Seismic Evaluation of Two Five-story Precast Concrete Hybrid Frame Buildings,” submitted to ASCE Structural Journal (under review).Google Scholar
  15. Seismology Committee. (1999), Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary (Blue Book). Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC), California, USA, 327–421.Google Scholar
  16. Sritharan S (2002), “Performance of Four Jointed Precast Frame Systems Under Simulated Seismic Loading,” Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Earthquake Engineering; Paper No. 264, Boston, USA.Google Scholar
  17. Sritharan S, Pampanin S and Conley J (2002), “Design Verification, Instrumentation and Test Procedures, PRESSS-3: The Five-story Precast Test Building,” Vol. 3-3. ISU-ERI-Ames Report ERI-03325, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, USA.Google Scholar
  18. Sritharan S and Rahman MA (2004), “Performance-based Seismic Assessment of Two Precast Concrete Hybrid Frame Buildings,” Proceedings of International Workshop on Performance-based Seismic Design, Bled, Slovenia.Google Scholar
  19. Thomas DJ (2003), “Analysis and Validation of a Seismic Design Method Proposed for Precast Jointed Wall Systems,” M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, USA.Google Scholar
  20. Thomas DJ and Sritharan S (2004), “An Evaluation of Seismic Design Guidelines Proposed for Precast Jointed Wall Systems,” ISU-ERI-Ames Report ERI-04635, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, USA, June.Google Scholar
  21. Tong M, Lee G, Rzhevsky V, Qi J and Shinozuka M (2004), “A Comparison of Seismic Risk of Nonstructural Systems in a Hospital Before and After a Major Structural Retrofit,” ATC-29-2 Seminar on Seismic Design, Retrofit, and Performance of Nonstructural Components in Critical Situationshttp://shingo8.eng.uci.edu/ATC-29-2.htm, date-11-17-2004
  22. Uniform Building Code (UBC) (1997), International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, California, USA, 2, 13–38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Iowa State UniversityAmesUSA
  2. 2.Iowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations