Modeling criteria of older non-ductile concrete frame–wall buildings

  • P. F. ParraEmail author
  • C. A. Arteta
  • J. P. Moehle
S.I.: Nonlinear Modelling of Reinforced Concrete Structural Walls


The purpose of seismic provisions included in modern building codes is to obtain a satisfactory structural performance of buildings during earthquakes. However, in the United States and elsewhere, there are large inventories of buildings designed and constructed several decades ago, under outdated building codes. Some of these buildings are classified as non-ductile buildings. Currently, under the ATC-78 project, a methodology is being developed to identify seismically hazardous frame–wall buildings through a simple procedure that does not require full nonlinear analyses by the responsible engineer. This methodology requires the determination of the controlling plastic collapse mechanism, the base shear strength, and the ratio between the story drift ratio and the roof drift ratio, called parameter \(\alpha\), at collapse level. The procedure is calibrated with fully inelastic nonlinear analyses of archetype buildings. In this paper we first introduce an efficient scheme for modeling frame–wall buildings using the software OpenSees. Later, the plastic collapse mechanism, the base shear strength, and values of \(\alpha\) are estimated from nonlinear static and dynamic analyses considering a large suite of ground-motion records that represent increasing hazard levels. The analytical experiment included several frame–wall combinations in 4 and 8-story buildings, intended to represent a broad range of conditions that can be found in actual buildings, where the simplified methodology to evaluate the risk of collapse can be applicable. Analysis results indicate that even walls of modest length may positively modify the collapse mechanism of nonductile bare frames preventing soft story failures.


Non-ductile buildings Nonlinear analysis Plastic collapse mechanism Base shear strength Hazard levels 



The research presented in this paper has been supported by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through the ATC 78 Project. Their support is gratefully acknowledged. Opinions, findings, conclusions and recommendations in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the sponsor or the Applied Technology Council.


  1. ACI-Committee-318 (2014) Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary (ACI 318-14). American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MIGoogle Scholar
  2. Araya-Letelier G, Parra PF, Lopez-Garcia D, Garcia-Valdes A, Candia G, Lagos R (2019) Collapse risk assessment of a Chilean dual wall-frame reinforced concrete office building. Eng Struct 183:770–779. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arteta CA, Abrahamson NA (2017) Methodology based on conditional scenario spectra to estimate engineering demand parameter risk. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 16th world conference on earthquake engineering, Santiago, ChileGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker JW (2011) Conditional mean spectrum: tool for ground-motion selection. J Struct Eng 137(3):322–331. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bažant ZP, Oh BH (1983) Crack band theory for fracture of concrete. Matériaux et Construction 16(3):155–177. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bazant ZP, Planas J (1997) Fracture and size effect in concrete and other quasibrittle materials, vol 16. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  7. Blume JA, Newmark NM, Corning LH (1961) Design of multistory reinforced concrete buildings for earthquake motions, vol 4. Portland Cement Association, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  8. Coleman J, Spacone E (2001) Localization issues in force-based frame elements. J Struct Eng 127(11):1257–1265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. CSI (2016) PERFORM 3D (Version 6.0.0). Computers and Structures Inc, Walnut Creek, CAGoogle Scholar
  10. Dabaghi M, Saad G, Allhassania N (2019) Seismic collapse fragility analysis of reinforced concrete shear wall buildings. Earthq Spectra 35(1):383–404. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dazio A, Beyer K, Bachmann H (2009) Quasi-static cyclic tests and plastic hinge analysis of RC structural walls. Eng Struct 31(7):1556–1571. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Borst R, Feenstra PH, Pamin J, Sluys LJ (1994) Some current issues in computational mechanics of concrete structures. Proceedings of the EURO-C, Swansea, UKGoogle Scholar
  13. Filippou FC (2009). Concrete02 material: linear tension softening—OpenSeesWiki. Command_Manual. Retrieved from–_Linear_Tension_Softening. Accessed 9 June 2010
  14. Filippou FC, Popov EP, Bertero VV (1983) Effects of bond deterioration on hysteretic behavior of reinforced concrete joints (Report UCB/EERC-83/19). Retrieved from BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  15. Fischinger M, Isakovic T, Kante P (2004) Implementation of a macro model to predict seismic response of RC structural walls. Comput Concr 1(2):211–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fischinger M, Rejec K, Isakovic T (2012) Modeling inelastic shear response of RC walls. Paper presented at the 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  17. Galanis PH, Moehle JP (2014) Development of collapse indicators for risk assessment of older-type reinforced concrete buildings (UCB/SEMM-2014/03). Retrieved from Accessed 12 Aug 2019
  18. Gogus A, Wallace JW (2015) Seismic safety evaluation of reinforced concrete walls through FEMA P695 methodology. J Struct Eng 141(10):04015002. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holmes WT, Liel AB, Mehrain M, Moehle JP, Somers P (2017) Seismic evaluation of older concrete frame, frame-wall, and bearing wall buildings for collapse potential, ATC-78-6. Preliminary report. Retrieved from Redwood CityGoogle Scholar
  20. ICBO (1976) Uniform building code (UBC1976). International Council of Building Officials, Whittier, p 728Google Scholar
  21. Kent DC, Park R (1971) Flexural members with confined concrete. J Struct Div 97(7):1969–1990Google Scholar
  22. Kolozvari K, Orakcal K, Wallace JW (2014) Modeling of cyclic shear-flexure interaction in reinforced concrete structural walls. I: Theory. J Struct Eng 141(5):10. Google Scholar
  23. Kolozvari K, Arteta C, Fischinger M, Gavridou S, Hube M, Isakovic T, Wallace J (2018a) Comparative study of state-of-the-art macroscopic models for planar reinforced concrete walls. ACI Struct J 115(6):1637–1657. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kolozvari K, Orakcal K, Wallace JW (2018b) New opensees models for simulating nonlinear flexural and coupled shear-flexural behavior of RC walls and columns. Comput Struct 196:246–262. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liel AB (2008) Assessing the collapse risk of California’s existing reinforced concrete frame structures: metrics for seismic safety decisions. (Doctoral thesis), Stanford University, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
  26. Maffei JR, Bonelli P, Kelly D, Lehman DE, Lowes LN, Moehle JP, Willford M (2014) ATC-94 Recommendations for seismic design of reinforced concrete wall buildings based on studies of the 2010 Maule, Chile Earthquake, Applied Technology Council. Retrieved from Redwood City, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  27. Massone LM, Alfaro JI (2016) Displacement and curvature estimation for the design of reinforced concrete slender walls. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 25(16):823–841. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Fenves GL (2007) Steel02 and hysteretic: material behavior. OpenSees comparison of modelling tools. Retrieved from Accessed 12 Aug 2019
  29. McKenna F (2016) Hysteretic material. OpenSees Wiki. Retrieved from Accessed 12 Aug 2019
  30. Mohd YMH (1994) Nonlinear analysis of prestressed concrete structures under monotonic and cyclic loadsGoogle Scholar
  31. Panagiotou M, Restrepo JI, Schoettler M, Kim G (2012) Nonlinear cyclic truss model for reinforced concrete walls. ACI Struct J 109:205Google Scholar
  32. Priestley MJN, Calvi GM, Kowalsky MJ (2007) Displacement-based seismic design of structures. IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  33. Scott MH (2011) Numerical integration options for the force-based beam-column element in OpenSees. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USAGoogle Scholar
  34. Scott MH, Hamutçuoğlu OM (2008) Numerically consistent regularization of force-based frame elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 76(10):1612–1631. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scott BD, Park R, Priestley MJN (1982) Stress–strain behavior of concrete confined by overlapping hoops at low and high strain rates. ACI J Proc 79(1):13–27. Google Scholar
  36. Spacone E, Filippou FC, Taucer FF (1996) Fibre beam-column model for non-linear analysis of R/C frame: part I. Formulation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 25:711–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thomsen JH, Wallace JW (2004) Displacement-based design of slender reinforced concrete structural walls-experimental verification. J Struct Eng ASCE 130(4):618–630. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vásquez JA, de la Llera JC, Hube MA (2016) A regularized fiber element model for reinforced concrete shear walls. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 45(13):2063–2083. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facultad de Ingeniería y CienciasUniversidad Adolfo IbáñezPeñalolén, SantiagoChile
  2. 2.Departamento de Ingeniería Civil y Ambiental, Universidad del NorteBarranquillaColombia
  3. 3.Ed and Diane Wilson Professor of Structural Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of California BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations