A

gooperEarcanInsArccalperor ,Futhe

KPer

its

macatStra andShFraBemaCocou

RRCconto arestumo

RUni(Em

MEngIran

EngUniAsh

T

Abstract— Reod structural Lrformance of thrthquake or windn be constructedsulating Concrechitectural reasolled this systemrformance is affeopening place a

undamental Periem . Keywords—Coriod- Nonlinear f

oday Concr.It found eve

weakness agaiSo since the baterial named ategorized in toructure. The cosemi natural

d wall Structurhear Wall". Aftance it becamecause of somade some openoupled Shear-Wupling beam syRapid Constru

C Shear wall nstruction anyNuclear Powe

e construct by udy on this syoment resisting

Reza Aghayari, Aiversity, Kermansh

mail: reza_agh@raMehrzad Tahamogineering, Kermann (E-mail: Taham*Mohammad Ashgineering ,Kermaiversity, Kermahrafy@kssriau.ac.i

B

T

einforced ConcreLateral Load Rehis Structural syd make it very pd by many diffeete form and ons some openims as Coupledected by some pand etc .This stuod and some p

oupled Shear Wfinite element St

I. INTROD

rete is one of men in historical inst Tension mbeginning it was Reinforced Co several typesombination of , good performre make a Struer the End of W

me very popume reasons , lining on walls aWall System ystem in Fig. 1uction and Goo

Coupling beay type of strucer Plans even this system al

ystem and comg frame was pu

Assistant Professor,hah,Iran azi.ac.ir r.aghayarouli Roudsari, Assnshah Branch , I

mouli@iauksh.ac.ir hrafy, Master of Sanshah Science ananshah, Iran ir Mohammad.ash

Base Sh

Reza

ete Shear wall iesisting systemsystem against u

popular in Enginerent methods lietc . For m

ing must maded Shear wall . parameters like Hudy determined parameters that

Wall - Base Shtatic Pushover A

DUCTION

most popular sStructures mad

make it bad for cwas mixed by Concrete. Strucs like Frame stboth Reinforc

mance and foructural system World War II( ular for Residike Architectuand called this

(You can se) .

od Structural pam system vctures from resand today milll over the wormbination betw

ublished by Kha

, Department of Ci

ri@gmail.com) sistant Professor, slamic Azad Uni mtrfkh@yahoo.c

Science Student ,nd Research Bra

(Corresponding hrafy@gmail.com)

hear anCoup

a Aghayari , M

is known as ones for years. Gounusual loads leering Societiesike Tunnel formmany reasons le on the walls

It's obvious tHeight or Geome

seismic base shhave relation w

ear - FundamenAnalysis

tructural materde by human. Bconstruction. some admixtu

ctural systems tructures or Wed Concrete (rmable materiacalled "Concr1945 ~1950 's)

dential Buildinure and etc, th

new system aee schematic

erformance mavery popular sidential buildllions of buildrld First practiween it and Ran[1] in 1964 .

ivil Engineering, R

Department of Cversity, Kermansh

com ). ,Department of Canch , Islamic A

author E-m).

nd Funpling B

Mehrzad Taha

e of ood like . It

m or like and that etry hear with

ntal

rial But

ure are

Wall ( as al ) rete ) in

ngs. hey as a

of

ade for ing ing ical RC .

Razi

Civil hah,

Civil Azad mail:

Fig. 1 Sc

He fcouplinpay somresponsdominanIn 1969definitioas "Co.In 197Elemenof SheaSince 1Shear wattentionof it .InShear wcyclic Fdifferenbe the models

Fig

ndameBeam S

amouli Rouds

chematic of a Cotwo Vertical

focused on beng in lateral lome attention se of these struant mode of the9 Tom Pauley[on of couplingoupling in Rein1 he published

nts as Spandrel ar diagonal Re1971 lots of awalls and thn on the Seism

n 1988 Lin & walls StructuresFinite Elementnt Shape and s

same experimand their form

g. 2 Wall SpecimReinf

ntal PeStructu

sari , Mohamm

oupled Shear (Hl Shear Wall as a

ehavior of Couoad distributioon torsional r

uctures and detee combined str[2] presented g beams for thenforced Concrd another articBeams . In 19

einforcement foarticles were

heir Performanmic base shear

Kuo publishes with openingt Analysis on size of Openinmental researcm of failure mod

mens with differeforcement (Lin &

eriod oures

mad Ashrafy

Horizontal Segmea Coupled Syste

upled walls anon of earthquakresponse on termined effectructures(Wall amore accurate

e first time andrete Shear wallcle to name th974 he studiedor Deep Couppublished abo

nce but they r and Importaned their knowl

g [3] .They perf12 One Storey

ng and verify th.Fig.2 & 3 de .

ent types of Open& Kuo1998 )

of RC

*

ent Connected em

nd effects of kes .He also the total 3D s of walls on and Frame) .

e and general d published it l Structures” ese coupling

d the strength ling beams . out coupling

rarely pay nt parameters ledge on the formed some y model with these models shows these

nings and

International Conference on Transport, Environment and Civil Engineering (ICTECE'2012) August 25-26, 2012 Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia)

127

F

affimseecau “NdomperanaandprocoeanabetAc

nonof rel

cal

,

stru

per

anait'sgoefftimsysMotha

Fig. 3 Failure m

They observe fected by open

mportant in faen in some casused by Shear In 1994 Ba

Nonlinear Thrminant reinforforming a newalysis RC wald by the metoposed by Aefficients for alyses in Bothtween them hections .He said

1. Edges A2. Base No3. Slab – W

Chopra & Geon-Coupled RCNorthridge 19

lation for funda

lculated by em

∑ 0.2

ucture and

riod . In 2003 and 2alysis on somes result in mosod performancfected by strucme period expstem . Balkayaodification facat this paramet

modes of Specime

that crackingning orientationilure mode sh

ses .Cracks Conand Bending. alkaya [4] inree-Dimensionorced Concretw Isoparametrll structure . Hthod of CapacTC40 , he ctwo 2 and 5

h 2D and 3D e said this diffthe critical poi

Around Openinodes Wall Interaction

ol [5] developeC Structures and

94 Earthquake amental period

mpirical relation

UBC 1

is always less

2004 Balkayae structures mst of times shoce . They find ictural Geometrperimental relaa et al also fo

ctor ie behavioter is affected

ens (Lin & Kuo1

g and failure n and size of

hapes too. Walncentrates in th

n his Doctonal behavior te Building Sic Nonlinear S

He did some Pcity Spectrum can predict s

stories modeand after his

ference is onlyints of this stru

ngs

n Zone ( Conn

ed some Sheard test them unto perform a

d .They found

n (

997 which is h

than 0.9 ) is

[6] and Kalkamade by tunnelows Extra Ordiit structural perry .They said eation must beocused on concor factor and itd by Geometry

1998 )

modes are vopenings is v

ll distortion hahe Critical pla

oral Dissertatof shear-w

Structures “afShell Element Pushover analy

Method (CSome base shls .He did th

s clear differeny for 3d coupluctures as :

ections)

r wall Coupledder the excitat

a better empirithat periods t. ,

.

ht is the height

Larger than r

an , perform tl form techniqinary rigidity arformance is veven fundamene edited for tcept of Respont's models shoand height sa

ery ery ave ces

ion wall fter for

ysis M)

hear ese nce ing

d or ion ical that

.

t of

real

this que; and ery ntal this nse

ows ame

as Baseand 5 S3D).It's Wall-Wetc . Thstructur In 20factor methodsome Nexperimfactor bCoefficbetween

Fig. 4

In thianalysissome mshow soand som

For thfreedommaterialaminarMass mcenter oelement

e Shear . They Storey Models Difference be

Wall Interactionhey tried to Cral codes for fu011 Tavafoghi(response mo

dology for TunnNumerical modmental model .between 4 to 6ient). Eshghi n behavior fact

4 Pushover Curv

is study somes by a nonlin

models with 1 ,ome relation b

me structural pa

II

his Study a Nom in each node al such as Reinfr Shear forces

matrix of elemeof element(Elet are shown he

Fig. 5

result Curves s are presenteetween 2D andn and Wall -Sla

Calibrate empirundamental Peri & Eshghi [7]odification fa

nnel form RC dels and verify. They calcula6.6 (Equals to

et al. had ntor and other p

ves for 2 and 5 S

Kalkan 2004

finite elementnear finite elem,2 ,3 ,.... story between base sarameters like

I. ELEMENT M

onlinear 8 Nod were used .It cforced concretand Tension Sents are concen

ement Center ore in Fig 5.

Schematic form

of Pushover aed here in Figd 3D is for 3D ab Interaction rical relations riod for this str] tried to evaluctor R) due building . The

y it by a 3 Storated response

0.25 ~0.15 ofno study on arameters with

Story models (Ba4)

t Nonlinear stament program model .This S

shear- Fundamgeometry and

ODELING

des that have Scan be definedte or compositeSoftening are dntrated as Lum

of Mass). Schem

m of Elements

analysis for 2 g. 4.(2D and

effects like , torsion and proposed by

ructures . uate behavior

to ATC63 ey performed rey 1/3 scale modification f Base Shear the relation

h geometry .

alkaya and

atic Pushover m is done on Study tried to mental period

height.

Six degree of d as a layered es .The inter-defined here . mped mass in matic of this

International Conference on Transport, Environment and Civil Engineering (ICTECE'2012) August 25-26, 2012 Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia)

128

thigreeleandof areus Acset

botusemiusetriaWia CfaiFigTa

plapla

Ethi2Φ

It supposed ickness of eaceater than 1/3 ement thicknesd slabs ). 7 diSteel Rebars

e defined as sm how we defin

ccording to Miatting is used fo

Fig. 6 Define

To define a Rth concrete ande a linear isotroises hardening e a Von-misesaxial behaviorilliam & WarnConstitutive milure zone .Youg 7. The propeable I.

Fig. 7 Failu

The models wan .It had no coan of models arEach Storey hickness are eΦ8@20 cm .

that Stress ch layer and of total elemen

sses are equal ifferent layer () is defined h

meared plate . (2ne a Nonlineaao2006 et al[8]. r this models .

of Layered RC layer ( M

III. MATERI

Reinforced cond steel in case opic material fplasticity .For linear elasticir of concrete nke [9] .William

model for triaxiu can see 5 Paerties of defin

ure Surface Shap

IV. MODELS

were consist of olumn but somre shown here

has 3.50 metersequals to 15

varies linearlayer thicknesnt thickness . Fto 15 cm (Sam

( 5 Layer Conchere. In this ca2*Φ8@20cm )

ar Layered ReinA Convergenc

Shell Element w

Miao2006)

IAL MODELING

crete element of nonlinear mfor steel and thr elastic regionity but a Const

plasticity is m & Warnke iial behavior ofarameter failured material ar

pe(William and W

S GEOMETRY

f a 19.8 * 9.8 mme wall connect

below in Fig 8s of height . A

cm and Rei

rly through ss should not For this model me for both wacrete and 2 Layase reinforcem). Fig 6.0 Shownforced Concr

ce based time s

with smeared stee

G

we should defmaterials. Here hen a bilinear vn of Concrete titutive model assumed due

in 1974 presenf concrete duere Zone shape re show below

Warnke 1975)

meter rectanguting beams. Flo

8. All Wall and floinforcements

the be all

alls yer

ment wed rete step

el

fine we

von we for to

nted e to in

w in

ular oor

oor are

An Aequals Elemenrebar in

Someon thos10% drTransvehave a ratios fodrift at tlevels tcombin05[13].

V. B

DriftPerformConsidesome vcurve cbe expr

TABL

Uniaxial Co

ModuluPois

Shear Transfer CShear Transfer C

Uniaxial CUnixial CBiaxial C

Ambient HUniaxial Crushin

hydro

Tensile

ModuluPoa

YieldTangant P

Fig. 8 Typica

Adoptive conveto 20 cm were

nts .Tension Snteraction . e Pushover Nose models . Forift for top leverse ( 3.50*0.1modal analysi

or both directiotop level in bo

the displacemenation .Primary

BASE SHEAR DE

ft Limit is mmance .Some evering a limit o

value for seismcan be estimateressed in term o

LE I . MATERIAL P

CONCRETE PROPE

ompressive Strength

us of Elasticity sson's Ratio

Coefficient for open Coefficient for closeCracking Strength Crushing Strength Crushing Strength Hydrostatic Stress

ng Strength under amstatic pressure Density e Crack Factor

Rebar Propertius of Elasticity ation Ratio ding Strength Plasticity Modulus

al Floor Plan wit

ergence mesh e used . ConcreStiffening are

onlinear Staticor 1 storey movel in both dire

=0.35 m=35 cmis first and coons .Then the

oth direction.( 7ent are determy design of mod

ETERMINATION

RESULTS

most importantvents like P-Δ

on structural drmic base sheaed. Even yieldof yield drift (n

PROPERTIES ERTIES h 2

250

crack e crack

323

43.mbient 43.

240

ies 200

401.0

th slab yield Surf

with maximumete Cover are 3considered fo

c Analysis werdel we push thection of Longm ). For 2 stor

ompute modal model was pu7.0*0.15=1.05m

mined from assudels are based

N AND CAPACIT

t parameter ieffect can be c

rift. By considar from Capacid point of the snon-dimension

25 Mpa

000 Mpa 0.2 0.45 0.8

.5 Mpa 25 Mpa 30 Mpa 301 Mpa 125 Mpa

00 Kg /m3

0.6

0000 Mpa 0.3

00 Mpa 035 Mpa

face

m mesh size 30 mm for all r concrete -

re done here hat model to gitudinal and rey model we combination shed for15% m) for other umed modal on ACI 318-

TY CURVE

n Structural controlled by

der drift limit ity Pushover structure can

nal Rotation )

International Conference on Transport, Environment and Civil Engineering (ICTECE'2012) August 25-26, 2012 Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia)

129

.ThthiyiemoFazCaanddisploII. Afrotha

Fig

Fig

FraFraFraFraFraFra

*Th

tim

0

1

2

3

4

Base Shear Coefficien

t ( C ) 

he width of Joiis drift limit. elding occurreodel It was poizileh 2011) be

apacity .So accd Iran's 2800splacement).Afotted and some

As mentioned bom modal comat includes 90 %

g. 9 Model 1 Sto

g. 10 Model 2 S

TABLE II. BA

LON

1 StoreyTransver

ame 1 1.70967ame 2 0.90596ame 3 1.12283ame A 0.76254ame B 0.74709ame C 1.020853D 0.3444

hese values are calc

Here, after dome periods for

0

1

2

3

4

0 1Top D

2 Storey T

int of BuildingAfter doing a

ed in drift mointed by some efore that this cording to som0 we limit dfter the analyse results has ex

before the defombinations of t% of Structural

orey Left) 3d TraLongitudinal P

Storey Left) 3d T3d Longitudinal

ASE SHEAR COEFF

NGITUDINAL DIREC

y rse

1 Storey Longitudina

7 0.5453 6 0.4321 3 0.2720 4 4.9555 9 1.8563 5 3.8084 1  0.1099 

culated from capac

oing some mor fundamental

0 20Drift % 

Transverse 

s Separation wanalysis it waore than 10% literature (likesystem have a

me structural codrift to 0.5%(is capacity pu

xpressed in Fig

ormation patterthe models ( Al mass had con

ansverse PushovPushover Curve

Transverse Pusho Pushover Curve

ICIENT IN BOTH TR

CTION(DRIFT* =0.5

al 2 Storey

Transverse 1.03315 0.69100 0.96788 0.55255 0.58576 0.65447 0.20813 

city curves at 0.5 p

odal Analysis dominant dyn

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

Base Shear Coefficien

t ( C ) 

2 Stor

were calculatedas seen that f

for top level e Paulay 2001 aa great Rotatioodes like ASCE(0.005 of heiushover curve hg 9 &10 and ta

rns are calculaAt least 4 Modnsidered here) .

ver Curve Right)

over Curve Rige

RANSVERSE AND

5 %)

2 Storey Longitudinal

0.25464 0.21994 0.24748 2.51836 1.35253 1.65556 0.051297

percent of drift.

for each monamic mode h

10 2Top Drift % 

rey Longituinal 

d by first

of and

onal E 7 ght has

able

ated des .

) 3d

ght)

odel has

comparlike UBStandar

10 tak0.0488 0.75 heTable II

Model name

1 Storey 2 Storey3 Storey

In thimodels Some o

A) Itstructur=2*Φ8@they canseismic not for and non B) It Responstrong radding jin Basebase she C) TSurfacetotal surBase Shbase shnon ope D) Aresistanare smaof in plare varieach dir E) Copresentesaid as structurshould c F) Asand by the modof abouhigh fre G) Indominan

20

red with empirBC 1997[10] ,rd2005[12] . ASC∗ for app

kes Ct and hn

(~0.05 ) and 0ere and the equII presented Ct

TABLE III.

Height Ti

3.5 m 0.07.0 m 0.010.5 m 0.

is article someof Coupling b

of important co

t was found thres (Wall thi@20 cm ) havn passed over design codes structural stab

n-structural elesounds that B

nse modificatiorelation with sjust one storey

e Shear Coeffiear in some caThe results she Area of openurface probablyhear Coefficie

hear coefficientened frames haAnalyses shownce in his planealler . But in 3Dlane and out ofies only by difrection. omparing the ved by ASCE 7

a result that ral fundamentacalibrated for ts shown in Tabincreasing the

del the value out 0.011 at its mequency. More n some modeant in the struct

rical relation p, ASCE 7-10CE 7-102010 pr

proximate fundfor RC shear

0.75. Due to xuation calibratt Value and Tim

. FUNDAMENTAL M

ime Period Frequ

0282 sec 35.060385 sec 25.97.0514sec 19.45

VI. CONCLUS

e pushover analbeam RC systenclusions are p

hat even with ckness = 15

ve good perfolarge rotationsand provisions

bility. ( other pements stabilityBase shear valuon factor ( i.etructural heighy on the 1 storicient was seeases ) . howed that sonings and the ray effected on Sent . (Very ext in frames witave seen here .)wed that mose but in out of D - because off plane actionsfference of hei

values for Ct ra7-10 ( 0.0488 in most of th

al period has athis type of stru

able III by incre bending behaof Ct has been mmaximum leve Studies should

els the 3D totural behavior .

presented by se02010[11] andesented empiri

damental periodr wall buildingx -Coefficient ated by the factme -Periods .

MODES, PERIODS

uency Ct

62 Hz 0.0110243Hz 0.00894602Hz 0.008814

SION

lysis was perfoems with 1, 2 apointed here in

minimum des cm and Re

ormance in dris ) and drift lims for other probproblem like sy ) ue ( Coefficien

e. Behavior facht ( Refer to Trey model a laen ( about half

ome other paratio of openingStructural perfoxtraordinary reth low ratio of) st of frames plane action thf homogenouss - it seems thaight and ratio o

atio in Table.IIIfor Shear wal

he cases codeat least 20% ofuctures specialeasing the heig

avior in overallmore accurate el and structurd be done in th

orsional effect.

eismic codes Iran's 2800

ical equation d . ASCE 7-g equals to are equals to tor of Ct .

Mode Shape

X-Transfer 6 Y-Transfer 4 Y-Transfer

ormed on the and ... story . n below:

sign of these einforcement ift capacity ( mits made by blem and it's

serviceability

nt ) and even ctor) have a

Table II. ) By arge decrease f of primary

ameters like gs surface to ormance and

esistance and f openings or

have great he base shear s distribution at base shear of opening in

I to Ct value ll ) it can be es period for f error and it lly . ght of model l behavior of on the value

re behaves in his case . t are more

International Conference on Transport, Environment and Civil Engineering (ICTECE'2012) August 25-26, 2012 Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia)

130

H) It seems that in this type of structures period are very related to other geometrical parameters and it needs more study in future . These analyses will be continued in its second phase to boost the knowledge and present better relation for base shear and fundamental period .

References

[1] Khan ,F R . Sbarounis ,J A (1964). Interaction of Shear Walls and Frames .Journal of Structural Devision , Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers ,Vol 90 No ST3 June 1964 ,ASCE

[2] Paulay ,T. Coupling in Reinforced Concrete Shear wall Structures ,(1969)

[3] Lin ,C Y . Kuo, C L.(1988) Behavior of shear wall with openings , Proceeding of Ninth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering , August 2-9 , 1988 Tokyo - Kyoto , Japan (Vol IV)

[4] Balkaya , Can .(1994) Nonlinear three - dimensional of shear wall dominant reinforced concrete building structures , Submitted Thesis in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in civil engineering , University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ,December 1993

[5] Chopra A,K . Geol,R ,K .(1998) Period Formulas for Concrete Shear Wall Buildings , ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering , Vol.124 , No4 ,April 1998 , Page 426-433

[6] Kalkan E , Balkaya ,Can . (2004) , Seismic Vulnerability , behavior and design of tunnel form Structures , Engineering Structures, Vol 26 Pages 2081-2099 , Doi :10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.07.005

[7] Tavafoghi .A, Eshghi .S (2011) , Evaluation of behavior factor of tunnel-form concrete building structures using Appiled Technology Council 63 methodology, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings , 8 June 2011 ,John Wiley & Sons DOI: 10.1002/tal.710

[8] Miao. Z W . Lu X Z . Jiang . J J ,Ye L P (2006) Nonlinear FE Model for RC Shear Walls Based on Multi-layer Shell Element and Micro plane Constitutive Model , COMPUTATIONAL METHODS IN ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE , EPMESC X, Aug. 21-23, 2006, Sanya, Hainan,China

[9] William ,J K . Warnke E R (1975) Constitutive Model for the Triaxial Behaviour of Concrete , Proceeding of the International Association for bridge and Structural Engineering , Vol .19 . Page 1-31 Bergamo ,Italy .1975

[10] Uniform Building Code (UBC) , 1997,USA [11] ASCE 07-10 , Minimum design loads for structures, American Society

of Civil Engineer , 2010 ,American Society of Civil Engineers -ASCE [12] Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of

Building(Iran's 2800 Standard ), (2005),Building and Housing Research Center BHRC - Publication Number : S253 ,3rd Edition ,Iran

[13] ACI Publication 318-05(2005) ,American Concrete Institute -2005 ACI

International Conference on Transport, Environment and Civil Engineering (ICTECE'2012) August 25-26, 2012 Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia)

131