PARAMETRIC STUDY ON EFFECTIVENESS OF SHEAR WALL PATTERNS IN REDUCING DRIFT OF TALL BUILDINGS USING...

8/10/2019 PARAMETRIC STUDY ON EFFECTIVENESS OF SHEAR WALL PATTERNS IN REDUCING DRIFT OF TALL BUILDINGS USING E-TABS

1/50

Prepared by:

Patel Dipali Y.(09 MS 10)

Guided by:Dr. J.A.Amin

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERINGFaculty of Technology

DHARMSINH DESAI UNIVERSITYNADIAD 387001 1


2/50

CONTENT

Introduction

Objective and Scope of Work

Literature Review

Study Parameters Parametric Study

Conclusion of Part Dissertation

Work to be done in Next Phase References

2


3/50

INTRODUCTION

Shear wall is a structural element used to resistlateral/horizontal/shear forces parallel to plane of thewall.

Shear wall provide lateral strength to resist horizontalearthquake forces and transfer these horizontal forces tothe next element in the load path below them.

It also providelateral stiffnessto prevent the roof or floorabove from excessive side-sway.

3


4/50

4


5/50

Reinforced concrete building structures can be classifiedas

1) Structural Frame Systems

2) Structural Wall Systems3) Shear WallFrame Systems

5


6/50

Driftmay be defined as the displacement of one storey relativeto the other storeyabove or below.

Drift control is necessary to limit damages to interiorpartitions, elevators and stair enclosures, glass, and cladding

systems.

The drift of the structure can be reduced by-

1. Changing the geometric configuration to alter the lateral

load resistance.2. Increasing the bending stiffness of the horizontal members.

3. Adding additional stiffness by the inclusion of shear wall inframe.

6


7/50

DRIFT LIMITATIONASCountry Year Max. interstorey

drift

Lateral deflection

India 2002 0.004h 0.002H

Euro code 1988 0.002h -

Yugoslavia 1982 0.0029h 0.0017H

By M.Fintel - 0.0015h 0.0007H

Canada 1995 0.004h 0.004H

Colombia 1981 0.015h 0.015H

Egypt 1988 0.0017h 0.0017H

Turky 1995 0.0035h 0.0035H

7


8/50

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF WORK

To evaluate the effectiveness of shear wall and its pattern inreducing the drift and top displacement of tall buildings.

To investigate and critically assesses the various arrangementsof staggered shear wall panels for their feasibility andadvantages as compared to the conventional shear wallsystem.

To analyse the reinforced concrete frame building withoutand with shear wall using seismic coefficient method,response spectra method 1893(Part-1)-2002 and time history

method using E-TABS 9.0.7. 8


9/50

LITERATURE REVIEW

Zeynep SindelRagip Akba and Semih S. Tezcan (1999) havedescribe the importance of drift control and damages in tallbuildings. Authors emphasized that a moment resisting framebuilding satisfying all requirements of strength and ductility maystill be subjected to severe nonstructural damages, if inter storeydrift are not restricted properly by means of shear wall.

Tolga Akis (2004) had suggested a model for shear wall-framestructures and analyze the nonplanner shear wall assemblies ofshear wall-frame structures. Several shear wall-frame systemshaving different shapes of nonplanner shear wall assemblies areanalyzed by static lateral load, response spectrum and time historymethods.

9


10/50

S.K.Rai , J.Prasad, A.K.Ahuja (2006) have done static analysis andnon-linear static analysis of a 35-storeyed reinforced concreteframe building provided with conventional shear wall and withdifferent arrangements of shear wall. The shear wall panels arebay-wide and storey deep discrete panels used to resist lateral loads.

K.K.Singh, S. Chakraborty and T.R.Reddy (2006)had carried out astudy on a 13 storeyed RC framed building to investigate the effectof openings in shear walls. The building was analyzed as a 3-Dframe with shear wall in both directions using matrix stiffness

methods and finite elements to represent the beams, columns, shearwalls and slabs.

10


11/50

S.K.Rai , J.Prasad, A.K.Ahuja (2006)have studied on Importance ofshear wall in Tall buildings. They had presented a paper on thecontrol of damage to buildings by way of increasing the stiffness byproviding shear walls and thereby restricting the lateral deflectionsunder the lateral loads. The analysis of a bare frame has done first

and later it has been stiffened with shear wall and analysis has beendone.

Quanfeng Wang (2007) had described the effect of the shear wallcutoff on storey drifts of frame-shear wall structures by analyzed

the structures using a member system-storey model undersimulated earthquake excitations.

11


12/50

STUDY PARAMETERS The parametric study has been carried out on 3 different

storeyed building for 3 different patterns of shear wall.

Building height considered:

1) 20-storeyed

2) 30-storeyed

3) 35-storeyed

Patterns of shear wall used in study are:1) Conventional shear wall Panels

2) Zigzag shear wall Panels

3) Diagonal shear wall Panels

12


13/50

BUILDING PLAN

13


14/50

DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING

SR No. Particulars Details

1. Number of storeys 20

2. Number of bay in X and Z direction 5

3. Spacing of frame in X and Z direction 5.0 m

4. Each storey height 3.5 m5. Size of all beams 300 mm x 600 mm

6. Size of columns (from ground to ten storey) 600mm x 600 mm

7. Size of columns (from eleven to twenty storey) 500 mm x 500 mm

8. Grade of concrete 30 MPa

9. Grade of steel 415 MPa

10. Slab thickness 150 mm

11. Live load 5 kN/m 14


15/50

INPUT PARAMETERS IN E-TABS

Plan dimension No. of storey

Material Property

Sizes of beams and columns

Thickness of slab

Property of shear wall

Different loads

Nature of diaphragms

15


16/50

RESULTS

Comparison of results for D.L. & L.L. case

Maximum column force

At storey one 8048.97 kN

At storey eleven 3907.62 kN

Maximum beam force and moment

V = 158.64 kN & M = 217.243 kN -m

Load case By Manually By ETAB

Dead load 86204.16 kN 87733.97 kNLive load 62500 kN 62500 kN

16


17/50

DIMENSION OF COLUMNS

Designing the column as Axially loaded

Pu= 0.4 x fckx Ac+ 0.67 x fyx Asc(From IS 456 :2000)Where Pu= Axial load on member

fck= Characteristic compressive strength of concreteAc= Area of concreteAsc= Area of longitudinal reinforcement for column

For ground storeyAc= 614789.73 mmB=D=784.08 mm

17


18/50

DIMENSION OF COLUMNS

From SP-16 (Chart 25)

Assuming p=1%

Ac

= 5500 cm

B=D=741.6 mm

For column at eleven storey

Pu=3907.62 kNB=D=526.71 mm (From IS 456:2000)

B=D=529.1 mm (From SP-16)

18


19/50

Taking the size of columns for

1) 1 to 10 storey 900 mm x 900 mm2) 11 to 20 storey 600 mm x 600 mm

Check for beam

V = 158.64 kN & M= 217.243 kN-m

Size of beam taken is 300 mm x 600 mm

Assuming 25 mm dia. Bars with 25 mm cover

Effective depth = 600-25-12.5 = 562.5 mmFrom SP-16 (Table D)

Mu,lim= 4.14 x 10 x b x d

= 392.97 kN-m > 217. 243 kN (O.K.)

19


20/50

20-Storey Building With Conventional Shear Wall

20


21/50

20-Storey Building With Diagonal Shear Wall

21


22/50

20-Storey Building With Zig-zag Shear Wall

22


23/50

METHODS OF ANALYSIS CONSIDERED

1) Static coefficient method

It is the simplest method and used widely.

It consists of following steps.

a) Estimate the first-mode natural period.

b) Choose the appropriate seismic base shear coefficient.

c) Calculate the seismic design base shear.

d) Distribute the base shear as component forces acting atdifferent levels of the structure.

e) Analyze the structure under the design lateral forces toobtain design actions.

23


24/50

Displacement comparison between four systems

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

displacementinmm

No. of storey

DISPLACEMENT

without S.W.

With Peri. S.W.

With Diag.S.W.

With zig-zag S.W.

24


25/50

SR.NO. DESCRIPTION MAX.

DISPLACEMENT

REDUCTION

IN

DISPLACEMENT

1. Building Without Shear Wall 57.70mm -

2. With Conventional Shear Wall 51.60mm 10.7%

3. With Diagonal Shear Wall 27.80mm 51.8%

4. With Zig-zag Shear Wall 27.7mm 52.0%

Diagonal and Zig-zag shear wall patterns may reduce more than 50%

of lateral displacements.

25


26/50

26


27/50

Interstorey Drift comparison between four

systems

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Driftinmm

No. of storey

DRIFT

Without S.W.

With Peri S.W.

With Diag.S.W.

With zig-zag S.W.

27


28/50

SR.NO. DESCRIPTION

MAX.

INTERSTOREY

DRIFT

REDUCTION

IN INTERSTOREY

DRIFT





Diagonal and zig-zag shear wall patterns are much effective inreducing interstorey drift compare to peripheral shear wall.

28


29/50

2) Response Spectrum Method

The response spectrum is given from IS 1893(Part-1):2002.

The building lies in zone Vand the soilbelow it is medium.

The importance factor is 1 and response reduction factor istaken as 5.

29


30/50

Displacement comparison between four systems

30

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Disp.

inmm

No. of storey

IS 1893 Spectra

Without S.w.

With Peri S.W.

With Diag S.W.

With zig-zag S.W.


31/50

SR.NO. DESCRIPTION MAX.

DISPLACEMENT

REDUCTION

IN

DISPLACEMENT





Diagonal and Zig-zag shear wall patterns may reduce more than 50%

of top lateral displacements.

31


32/50

Interstorey Drift comparison between four

systems

32

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Driftinmm

No. of storey

IS 1893 Spectra

Without S.W.

with Peri S.W.

With Diag.S.W.

With zig-zag S.W.


33/50

SR.NO. DESCRIPTION

MAX.

INTERSTOREY

DRIFT

REDUCTION

IN INTERSTOREY

DRIFT





Zig-zag shear wall patterns are much effective in reducinginterstorey drift compare to peripheral shear wall.

33


34/50

3) Time history method

A selected earthquake motion is applied directly to the base ofthe structure. For the full duration of the earthquake,instantaneous stresses throughout the structure are evaluatedat small time interval.

It is much used in inelastic analysis.

Considered earthquake ground motion for study is-June 28, 1992 Landers, California, at Lucerne Valley

34


35/50

NEAR FAULT EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTIONS

Near-fault earthquake

ground motions

Recording station

Duration

(sec)

PGD

(m)

PGV

(m/sec)

PGA

(

)

October 15, 1979Imperial Valley,

California

El Centro Array#5

39.420(1971/0.02)

0.765 0.98 0.37

January 17, 1994Northridge, California Newhall

60.000(3000/0.02)

0.381 1.19 0.72

June 28, 1992

Landers,

LucerneValley

49.284

(12321/0.004)

2.300 1.36 0.71

January 17, 1994Northridge, California

Rinaldi14.950

(2990/0.005)0.391 1.75 0.89

January 17, 1994Northridge, California

Sylmar60.000

(3000/0.02)0.311 1.22 0.73

35


36/50

Displacement Comparison along X-Direction

between Four Systems

36

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Disp.

inmm

No. of storey

Lucerne

Without S.W.

Peri. S.W.

Diag.S.W.

Zig-zag S.W.


37/50

SR.NO. DESCRIPTION

MAX.

DISPLACEMENT

REDUCTION

IN

DISPLACEMENT

1. Building Without Shear Wall 280mm -




.

37


38/50

38


39/50

Displacement Comparison along Y-Direction


39

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Disp.

inmm

No. of storey

Lucerne

Without S.W.

Peri. S.W.

Diag. S.W.

Zig-zag S.W.


40/50

SR.NO. DESCRIPTION

MAX.

DISPLACEMENT

REDUCTION

IN

DISPLACEMENT


2.With Conventional ShearWall 232.7mm 4.25%



.

40


41/50

Interstorey Drift Comparison along X-Direction


41

0

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Driftinmm

No. of storey

Lucerne

Without S.W.

Peri S.W.

Diag. S.W.

Zig-zag S.W.


42/50

SR.NO. DESCRIPTION

MAX.

INTERSTOREY

DRIFT

REDUCTION

IN INTERSTOREY

DRIFT





More than 50% of drift can be reduced with diagonal and zig-zagshear wall.

42


43/50

Interstorey Drift Comparison along Y-Direction


43

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Driftinmm

No. of storey

LUCERNE

Without S.W.

Peri. S.W.

Diag. S.W.

Zig-zag S.W.


44/50

SR.NO. DESCRIPTION

MAX.

INTERSTOREY

DRIFT

REDUCTION

IN INTERSTOREY

DRIFT





Diagonal and zig-zag shear wall patterns are much effective inreducing interstorey drift compare to peripheral shear wall.

44


45/50

CONCLUSION

The lateral displacement of frame with conventional shear wall isreducedas much as 10% to 12% and interstorey drift is reducedabout15%as compared to the building frame without shear wall.

The lateral displacement of frame with diagonal and zig-zag shear

wallframe is reducedas much as 50%and 48% to 50% respectively ascompared to the building frame with conventional shear wall.

The interstorey drift of frame with diagonal and zig-zag shear wallframe is reduced as much as 42% and 48% to 50% respectively ascompared to the building frame with conventional shear wall.

Hence, diagonal and zig-zag shear wall patterns gives better resultcompare to conventional shear wall.

45


46/50

WORK TO BE DONE IN NEXT PHASE

The same dynamic analysis will be done for 30-storeyed and35-storeyed building and comparison will be done forinterstorey drift and top lateral displacement between foursystems.

To do modeling and analysis of reinforced concrete buildingwith patterns of shear wall for finding out lateral loads sharedby frames and shear wall.

46


47/50


48/50

Rai, S.K., Prasad J. and Ahuja, A.K., (2006), Reducing Drift and

Damages in Tall Buildings by Shear Wall Panels, Nationalconference on High-Rise Buildings: Materials and Practices, NewDelhi, India, October 30-31, 2006.

Rai, S.K., Prasad J. and Ahuja, A.K., (2006), Importance of ShearWall in Tall buildings, National conference on High-RiseBuildings: Materials and Practices, New Delhi , India, October 30-31 ,2006.

Singh, K.K., Chukraborty S. and Reddy, T.R., Effect of Openings inShear Walls of Multistoried Buildings, National conference on

High-Rise Buildings: Materials and Practices, New Delhi, India,October 30-31, 2006.

Tolga Akis (2004),Thesis on Lateral load Analysis of Shear WallFrame-Structure,Tokiyo

48


49/50

Taranath Bungale S. (2005) Wind and Earthquake ResistantBuilding,Taylors and Frnci Group.

Varghese, P.C., AdvancedReinforced Concrete Design.Prentic HallIndia, New Delhi.

Wang-chu-kia and Salmon Charles G. Reinforced Concrete

design,Wesley Educational Publisher Inc. Zeynep, S.A. and Tezcan, S. S. (1999), Importanceof drift control

and damages in tall buildings.

49


50/50

PARAMETRIC STUDY ON EFFECTIVENESS OF SHEAR WALL PATTERNS IN REDUCING DRIFT OF TALL BUILDINGS USING...

Documents

Transcript of PARAMETRIC STUDY ON EFFECTIVENESS OF SHEAR WALL PATTERNS IN REDUCING DRIFT OF TALL BUILDINGS USING...