CoreWall Prototype Presented by Arun Rao @ EVL’s Tech Meeting 8/25/04.
Yang_PTgravity- Slab-framing System in Concrete Corewall for High Rise Building - Presentation
of 31
-
Upload
shakirhamid6687 -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
description
high rise buildings in concrete presentation of structural systems referring to post-tensioned floors in interaction with core walls and other vertical load carrying members
Transcript of Yang_PTgravity- Slab-framing System in Concrete Corewall for High Rise Building - Presentation
-
Seismic behavior and modeling of gravity-slab-framing system in concrete core wall high-rise buildings
Tony Yang, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, University of British Columbia
-
116 Completed (>75m ~= 240 ft.) 43 Planned 20 Demolished 5 under construction 13 Never built
Source: http://www.emporis.com/
High-rise buildings in San Francisco
(On hold.)
-
Concrete core shear wall buildings
MKA
-
San Francisco, Rincon Center
-
MKA
Concrete core shear wall buildings
Core shear wall
Link beam PT slab
-
Concrete core shear wall buildings
http://activerain.com
Gravity column Core wall PT slab
-
Structural design
Code design:
Design the core wall without the gravity system.
Design the gravity system without the seismic effect.
Gravity system need to be design for the ductility
Questions: Is it safe ?
Is it all?
MKA
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
UCB
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
m1 m2
w
m2
Slab (BC element with lumped plastic hinges).
Wall (BC element)
Column (BC element)
F1, D1 (master) F1, D1 (slaved)
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 -30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
Drift ratio [-]
Forc
e [ki
ps]
Experimental Test Analytical Simulation
-
Floo
r N
umbe
r Lateral system
Gravity-only system
Nonlinear analytical model
Fiber section
-
UCLA J. Wallace
Modeling the concrete coupling beams
M, M,
Analytical Experimental
M
-
Perform3D gravity framing systems
A A
Plane A-A view Lump plastic hinge model:
-
Nonlinear dynamic analyses
3D bi-directional shaking.
Ground motion are selected based on:
Database: PEER NGA database. Magnitude (Mw): 6.5 - 8. Distance (R): 10 km (0 - 20 km). Useable periods: > 8 sec.
-
Selection of the ground motions
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
2
Period [sec]
Sa [g
] CW48WGF (T1 = 4.3 sec)
CapCPM (SF = 2.1) CapFOR (SF = 4.1) CapPET (SF = 2.3) DuzDZC (SF = 1.2) GazGAZ (SF = 1.8) KobAMA (SF = 2.1) KobFKS (SF = 2.5) KobPRI (SF = 1.4) LomLGP (SF = 1.1) LomSTG (SF = 2.5) LomWVC (SF = 2.1) Target spectrum (MCE - SF) Mean (MCE - SF)
0.2 T1 to 1.5 T1
-
Variation of EDP vs. story height
-
Variation of EDP vs. story height
X S
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 B5 L1 L6 L11 L16 L21 L26 L31 L36 L41
axialForceGCS [kips]
Floo
r num
ber [
-]
x 1e3
GL + GM GL + PushoverX GL + mean GM GL + mean GM std GM
CW48WGF
Average = 96% of PushoverX Max = 99% of PushoverX Min = 90% of PushoverX
-
Maximum un-factored axial forces
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 B5 L1 L6
L11 L16 L21 L26 L31 L36 L41
axialForceGCS [kips]
Floo
r num
ber [
-]
DL
LL LLred
EQ
-14 x 10 3
-
Maximum factored axial forces
-2 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 x 10 4
B5 L1 L6
L11 L16 L21 L26 L31 L36 L41
axialForceGCS [kips]
Floo
r num
ber [
-]
1.4*DL 1.2*DL+1.6*LLred 1.0*DL+0.25*LL+EQ
90% of design load.
-
Effect of modeling the gravity system
Change in structural periods and stiffness
T1 T2 T3 CW48NGF 4.72 sec 4.10 sec 2.66 sec CW48WGF 4.27 sec 3.86 sec 2.65 sec
% change in stiffness 22% 13% 1%
-
Effect of modeling the gravity system
0 50 100 B5 L1 L6
L11 L16 L21 L26 L31 L36 L41
Floo
r num
ber [
-]
Story Drift H1 [in.]
0 1e4 2e4 3e4 B5 L1 L6
L11 L16 L21 L26 L31 L36 L41
Core Shear - H1 [kips]
0 1 2 3 x10 7 B5
L1 L6
L11 L16 L21 L26 L31 L36 L41
Core Moment - H2[kip-in.]
CW48WGF CW48NGF
1.5% of building height
-
Summary and conclusions
Slab-wall-column framing is a prevalent design.
Experimental tests and analytical simulations
have been conducted to study the seismic effect.
Effect on structural responses:
Stiffness:
Core wall:
Gravity column:
(10% ~ 25% ). Modest change. Insignificant.
a) Potential significance.
b) Simplified plastic analysis.
-
Questions and suggestions? Thank you for your attention!
Contact information:
Tony Yang: [email protected]
http://peer.berkeley.edu/~yang/
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
Hwang and Moehle (2000) ACI Structural Journal
Beff = 120
Beff = 80
Effective slab width:
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
8 120
1.5 1.5
#5 A615 Grade 60 steel @ 12 o.c.
fc = 6100 psi (@ 17 days)
67
100
Stress [ksi]
Strain [-]
0.08 0.12
E = 2900 ksi
90
A615 Grade 60 steel rebar:
0
Stress [ksi]
Strain [-] 0.002 0.005
Concrete (fc = 6100 psi @ 17 days):
0
6.1
-
PT slab column wall gravity system
Plastic rotation [-]
M1
[kip-
in.]
-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 -2
-1
0
1
2
-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
x1e3 x1e3
M2
[kip-
in.]
Plastic rotation [-]
M+,+
