Design Example 2 Reinforced Concrete Wall with Coupling Beams

Similar documents
Office Building-G. Thesis Proposal. Carl Hubben. Structural Option. Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari

COMPARISON OF MULTISTORY WALL RESULTS BETWEEN ADAPT-EDGE 1 AND ETABS 2 CONCRETE FRAME WITH SHEARWALLS

Alexis Pacella Structural Option Dr. Schneider Lexington II, Washington D.C. Technical Report #3 November 21,

REINFORCED CONCRETE WALL BOUNDARY ELEMENT LONGITUDINAL REINFORCING TERMINATION

PEER/CSSC Tall Building Design Case Study Building #1. J. Andrew Fry John Hooper Ron Klemencic Magnusson Klemencic Associates

111 MORGAN ST. Ryan Friis

Rutgers University Law School Building Addition and Renovation Camden, NJ

Danielle Shetler - Structural option Courtyard by Marriott Lancaster, PA

Structural Engineering, Mechanics, and Materials. Preliminary Exam - Structural Design

Multi-Story Solid Tilt-Up Wall Panel Analysis and Design (ACI 551)

PUSHOVER ANALYSIS OF A 19 STORY CONCRETE SHEAR WALL BUILDING

MODELLING OF SHEAR WALLS FOR NON-LINEAR AND PUSH OVER ANALYSIS OF TALL BUILDINGS

Executive Summary Building Description: Introduction... 13

Technical Report #3. Matthew R Peyton

THE FORENSIC MEDICAL CENTER

Analysis and Design of One-way Slab System (Part-I)

ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERISITY THESIS PROJECT

DESIGN OF HIGH-RISE CORE-WALL BUILDINGS: A CANADIAN PERSPECTIVE

MOUNTAIN STATE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD HEADQUARTERS

REINFORCED ENGINEERING HANDBOOK CLAY AND CONCRETE MASONRY SEVENTH EDITION. John M. Hochwalt, PE, SE KPFF Consulting Engineers

EVALUATION OF COLLECTOR DESIGN FOR CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS

Brent Ellmann Structural Option 200 Minuteman Park, Andover, MA Structural Consultant: Dr. Hanagan

One-Way Wide Module Joist Concrete Floor Design

Special Reinforced Concrete Structural Walls

OVERALL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM

SEAU 5 th Annual Education Conference 1. ASCE Concrete Provisions. Concrete Provisions. Concrete Strengths. Robert Pekelnicky, PE, SE

Reinforced Concrete Spread Footing (Isolated Footing) Analysis and Design. Design Footing

Dead Loads (psf): Concrete Floor Slab on Metal Deck 45 psf Mechanical and Ceiling 7 psf Miscellaneous 5 psf Exterior Wall 80 psf

Pushover Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures with Coupled Shear Wall and Moment Frame. *Yungon Kim 1)

LEARNING OF ETABS. 15 ft

TECHNICAL REPORT III LATERAL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM ANALYSIS

Simplified Building Schematic for Typical Floor (Levels 9 through 22):

CE 3150 Reinforced Concrete Design Design Project

Supplemental Plan Check List for Concrete Special Moment Resisting Frame

Handout. A Designer s Guide to Displacement-Based Design of RC Structural Walls

U.S. General Services Administration Progressive Collapse Design Guidelines Applied to Concrete Moment-Resisting Frame Buildings

School of Engineering and Applied Science Building Miami University, Oxford, OH Technical Assignment 3 December 3, 2007

STRUCTURAL APPLICATIONS OF A REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM-COLUMN-SLAB CONNECTION MODEL FOR EARTHQUAKE LOADING

Precast Concrete Bearing Wall Panel Design (Alternative Analysis Method) (Using ACI )

Software Verification

SEISMIC DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF HYBRID MASONRY WITH FUSE CONNECTORS ROBERT ASSELIN THESIS

[TECHNICAL REPORT 3] Lateral System Analysis

40 Bond New York, NY. Technical Report 3

William W. Wilkins Professional Building

Effect of Axial load on deformation capacity of RC column

COMPARISON OF A REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING STRENGTHRND WITH VARIOUS METHODS

Failure Mechanism of Reinforced Concrete Structural Walls with and without confinement

VARIOUS TYPES OF SLABS

Earthquake Design of Flexible Soil Retaining Structures

Table of Contents 2. Structural Systems.4 Foundations.4 Floor System...4 Columns..5 Lateral System...5

HIGH RISE CONDO SOHO, NEW YORK, NY

Third Avenue New York, NY. Structural Concepts/ Structural Existing Conditions Report September 30, Michelle L.

Technical Assignment 3 December 3, 2007

S. B. Talaeitaba Department of Civil engineering, Islamic Azad University of Khomeinishahr, Iran

CUREe-Kajima Flat Plate 1 Kang/Wallace

ctbuh.org/papers Evaluation of Progressive Collapse Resisting Capacity of Tall Buildings Title:

CALTRANS SDC PROCEDURE

Comparative Study of Irregular-shaped RC Building with Different Lateral Load Resisting Systems

Structural Technical Report 1 Structural Concepts / Existing Conditions

Modeling of Shear Walls for Nonlinear and Pushover Analysis of Tall Buildings

Masonry and Cold-Formed Steel Requirements

Question 8 of 55. y 24' 45 kips. 30 kips. 39 kips. 15 kips x 14' 26 kips 14' 13 kips 14' 20' Practice Exam II 77

3. Analysis Procedures

SEISMIC EVALUATION AND RETROFIT OF A HOSPITAL BUILDING USING NONLINEAR STATIC PROCEDURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASCE/SEI 41-06

Linear and Nonlinear Seismic Analysis of a Tall Air Traffic Control (ATC) Tower

Case Study: Challenges of a Single-layer Reticulated Dome

Structural Redesign Gravity System

A Performance Based Evaluation of a Wall- Frame Structure Employing the Pushover Analysis Tool

Continuous Beam Design with Moment Redistribution (ACI )

This point intends to acquaint the reader with some of the basic concepts of the earthquake engineer:

Seismic Behaviour of RC Shear Walls

Seismic Evaluation of an Existing Building Using Performance Based Design. Sammar Iqbal. Junior Design Engineer, EA Consulting Pvt. Ltd.

twenty two concrete construction: flat spanning systems, columns & frames Reinforced Concrete Design Reinforced Concrete Design

International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development REVISION OF IS: A REVIEW (PART 2)

3.5 Tier 1 Analysis Overview Seismic Shear Forces

Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Beam- Column Joints of Mid-America Bridges Part 2: Steel Sheet and Plate Retrofit

How to Design a Singly Reinforced Concrete Beam

Practical Nonlinear Analysis for Limit Design of Reinforced Masonry Walls

ACI Code Revisions Impact on StructurePoint Software

REINFORCED CONCRETE. Finley A. Charney, Ph.D., P.E.

CASE STUDY OF A 40 STORY BRBF BUILDING LOCATED IN LOS ANEGELES

Third Avenue New York, NY. Lateral System Analysis and Confirmation Design November 13, Michelle L. Mentzer.

MCEER Hospital Demonstration Project

ADAPT-PT 2010 Tutorial Idealization of Design Strip in ADAPT-PT

Arlington, Virginia December 3, 2007 TECHNICAL REPORT III LATERAL SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND CONFIRMATION DESIGN

Displacement-Based Seismic Analysis of A Mixed Structural System

twenty two concrete construction: flat spanning systems, columns & frames ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURES: FORM, BEHAVIOR, AND DESIGN

1000 CONTINENTAL SQUARE

DESIGN OF A STEEL SPECIAL MOMENT FRAME SUSCEPTIBLE TO HIGH SEISMIC RISK

Shear Wall Design Manual ACI

Strategies for mitigation of progressive collapse of corner panels in reinforced concrete buildings

Reinforced Concrete Tilt-Up Wall Panel Analysis and Design (ACI 551)

INHERENT DUCTILITY OF REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS WITH NON-SEISMIC DETAILING

Letter of Transmittal

Design- Lateral System:

Behaviour and design of innovative hybrid coupled shear walls for steel buildings in seismic areas

Erie on the Park. Timothy Moore Penn State University Architectural Engineering Structural Emphasis Advisor: Prof. Ali Memari

Lateral System Analysis and Confirmation Design

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PURE AND APPLIED RESEARCH IN ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

LATERAL LOAD BEHAVIOR OF UNBONDED POST-TENSIONED HYBRID COUPLED WALLS. Qiang SHEN Graduate Research Assistant. Yahya C. KURAMA Assistant Professor

Transcription:

Design Example 2 Reinforced Concrete Wall with Coupling Beams OVERVIEW The structure in this design example is a six story office building with reinforced concrete walls as its seismic force resisting system. The example focuses on the design and detailing of one of the reinforced concrete walls. This is a coupled wall running in the transverse building direction. The example assumes that design lateral forces have already been determined for the building and that the seismic moments, shears, and axial forces on each of the wall components are given from computer analysis. The purpose of this design example is to illustrate the design of coupling beams and other aspects of reinforced concrete wall design. 2015 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 3 27

OUTLINE 1. Building Geometry and Loads 2. Load Combinations for Design 3. Preliminary Sizing of Wall 4. Coupling Beam Strength and Diagonal Reinforcement 5. Flexural Reinforcement of Wall Piers 6. Plastic Mechanism Analysis 7. Shear Reinforcement of Wall Piers 8. Detailing of Wall Pier Boundary Elements 9. Detailing of Coupling Beams 1. Building Geometry and Loads ASCE 7 1.1 GIVEN INFORMATION This design example follows the general building code requirements of the 2015 International Building Code (2015 IBC) and ASCE/SEI 7. For structural concrete design, the 2015 IBC references the American Concrete Institute Building Code (ACI 318), as indicated in Section 1901.2. This example follows the requirements of ACI 318-14. Discussions of the SEAOC Blue Book recommendations refer to the document Recommended Lateral Force Recommendations and Commentary (SEAOC, 1999) as well as the Blue Book online articles on specific topics (SEAOC, 2009) as applicable. The wall to be designed is one of several reinforced concrete walls in the building. The design and analysis of the structure is based on a response modification coefficient, R, of 5 (ASCE 7 Table 12.2 1) for a bearing wall system with special reinforced concrete shear walls. The deflection amplification factor, C d, is 5. The SEAOC Blue Book (2009, Article 09.01.010) expresses the opinion that the R value for concrete bearing wall systems (R = 5) and that for walls in building frame systems (R = 6) should be the same, which may be justified based on detailing provisions. To be consistent with the current code requirements though, this design example uses R = 5. Mapped spectral response acceleration values from ASCE 7 maps (Figures 22 1 through 22 11): S 1 = 0.65 S S = 1.60 Site Class D 28 2015 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 3

S DS = 1.07 Risk Category II Seismic Design Category D Redundancy factor, ρ = 1.0 Seismic Importance factor, I = 1.0 Concrete strength, f c = 4000 psi Steel yield strength, f y = 60 ksi 1.2 DESIGN LOADS AND LATERAL FORCES The wall elevation, a plan section, and the design forces are shown in Figure 2 1. A linear static analysis of the wall for lateral forces, using a computer analysis program, gives the results shown in Figure 2 2, which shows the moments and shear for each coupling beam (i.e., wall spandrel), and the moments, shear, and axial forces for each vertical wall segment (i.e., wall pier). Lateral story displacements corresponding to effective section properties are also shown on the figure. In the analysis model, the member stiffness used is 30 percent of the gross member stiffness for the walls and 10 percent of the gross member stiffness for the coupling beams. The recommendations for member stiffness assumptions are based on Section 5.3 of Paulay and Priestley (1992). ASCE/SEI 41-13 recommends an effective stiffness of 50 percent of the gross member stiffness for walls, though tests and moment curvature analysis predict lower stiffness depending on axial load, section geometry, reinforcement ratio, and loading history (Adebar et al 2007, Schotanus and Maffei 2007). In this design example, the displacement output is used in Part 8.2 for determining the need for special boundary elements. In an actual building design, the displacements would also need to be considered for (a) design of elements not part of the lateral-force-resisting system, (b) building separations, and (c) P Δ analysis. Gravity loads are not included in the computer model. Gravity effects are added separately by hand calculations. 2015 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 3 29

Figure 2 1. Wall elevation, plan section, and design forces 30 2015 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 3

Figure 2 2. Results of ETABS computer analysis (kips, inches) 2015 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 3 31

2. Load Combinations for Design ASCE 7 Load combinations for reinforced concrete are discussed in detail in Part 2 of Design Example 1. As in that example, the governing load combinations become (1.2 + 0.2S DS )D + ρq E + L + 0.2S (0.9 0.2S DS )D + ρq E Because there is no snow load, S = 0. As indicated in Section 12.4.2.3, the load factor on L in the above combination is permitted to equal 0.5 since the given structure is an office building with L o = 50 psf per ASCE 7 Table 4.1. With S DS = 1.07, ρ = 1.0, and a live load factor of 0.5, the governing load combinations for this design example are 1.41D + Q E + 0.5L 0.686D + Q E The forces shown in Figure 2 2 correspond to Q E. 3. Preliminary Sizing of Wall For walls with diagonally reinforced coupling beams, the required wall thickness is often dictated by the layering of the reinforcement in the coupling beam, described in Part 9 of this example. For the subject wall, a wall thickness, b w, of 16 inches will be tried. Although not required by code, the SEAOC Blue Book (2009, Article 09.01.010) recommends rotation limits of 0.03 to 0.05 radians for confined coupling beams unless higher values can be justified by testing specimens that have aspect ratios and reinforcement similar to those to be used in the design. Rotation limits can affect the proportioning of walls so that coupling beams are not too short relative to wall piers. This design example assumes that the building walls and coupling beams have been proportioned to satisfy this requirement. This can be checked using the displacements δ u from Table 2 12 and calculating the corresponding coupling beam rotation θ cb as described in Part 6 of this example. 4. Coupling Beam Strength and Diagonal Reinforcement ACI 318 4.1 REQUIREMENT FOR DIAGONAL REINFORCEMENT Code requirements for the diagonal reinforcement of coupling beams (ACI 318 Section 18.10.7.4) are based on the clear length-to-overall-depth ratio for the coupling beam, l n /h, and on the level of shear stress in the coupling beam. For the wall in this design example, l n /h = 72 in / 72 in = 1.00 for the typical coupling beam, and l n /h = 72 in / 120 in = 0.60 for the coupling beams at the second floor. As shown in Table 2 1 (5th column), for four of the nine coupling beams the shear exceeds ( 4l f ) c A, cw where A cw = b w h and l = 1.0 for normal weight concrete. For these coupling beams, diagonal reinforcement is required. 32 2015 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 3

For the five coupling beams that have lower shear stress, diagonal reinforcement is not required by ACI 318. Designing these five coupling beams without diagonal reinforcement, using horizontal reinforcement to resist flexure and vertical stirrups to resist shear, might lead to cost savings in the labor to place the reinforcing steel. In this design example, however, diagonal reinforcement is used in all of the coupling beams of the wall because (a) it can simplify design and construction to have all coupling beams detailed similarly, (b) research results show that diagonal reinforcement improves coupling beam performance, even at lower shear stress levels, as discussed in of the SEAOC Blue Book (1999, Section C407.7), and (c) uniform and consistent yielding up the height of the structure results in better overall performance. Grid Line Level Table 2 1. Coupling beam forces and diagonal reinforcement V u Diagonal (kips) h (in) V /b b h f () 1 Bars u w c A vd (in 2 ) α (degrees) φv n (kips) φv n /V u C-D Roof 151 72 2.1 4 #8 3.16 37.9 175 1.16 C-D 6th 325 72 4.5 4 #11 6.24 37.9 345 1.06 C-D 5th 447 72 6.1 6 #11 9.36 36.0 495 1.11 C-D 4th 211 72 2.9 4 #9 4.00 37.9 221 1.05 C-D 3rd 180 72 2.5 4 #9 4.00 37.9 221 1.23 C-D 2nd 285 120 2.3 4 #9 4.00 53.1 288 1.01 D-E 4th 319 72 4.4 6 #9 6.00 36.0 317 0.99 D-E 3rd 454 72 6.2 6 #11 9.36 36.0 495 1.09 D-E 2nd 406 120 3.3 4 #11 6.24 53.1 449 1.11 Note: 1. Diagonal bars are required per ACI 318 Section 21.9.7.2 when this ratio exceeds 4 and l n /h < 2. 4.2 DESIGN OF DIAGONAL REINFORCEMENT Diagonal reinforcement is provided in the coupling beams according to Equation 18.10.7.4 of ACI 318 Section 21.9.7.4 φv =φ 2A A f sin α 10 f A. Eq 18.10.7.4 φ f n v d y c cw Each group of diagonal bars must consist of at least four bars per ACI 318 Section 18.10.7.4(b). The calculation of the required diagonal reinforcement is shown in Table 2 1. For coupling beams with higher shear stresses, six bars are needed in each group, as shown in Table 2 1. The angle, α, of the diagonal bars is calculated based on the geometry of the reinforcement layout, as shown in Figure 2 3. The value of α depends somewhat on the overall dimension of the diagonal bar group and on the clearance between the diagonal bar group and the corner of the wall opening. This affects the dimension, x, shown in Figure 2 3 and results in a slightly different value of α for a group of six bars compared to that for a group of four bars, as shown in Table 2 1. 2015 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 3 33