Handouts-Seismic Load Distribution at A Floor Level

Lecture Handouts
Wednesday,
19th Feb, 2014
Short Course on Sesimic Design of Reinforced and Confined Masonry Buildings, IIT Gandhinagar, Feb 17-21, 2014
Short Course on Seismic Design of Reinforced and Confined Masonry Buildings

February 17-21, 2014, IIT Gandhinagar, India
Topics
1. Diaphragms
2. Wallstiffness
No. 2
Diaphragms Functions
Thebasicfunctionsofadiaphragmunderseismic
loadsare:
Tocollectinertialoadsarisingfromfloorweightsand
liveloads
Todistributelateralloadstothevariousvertical
elementsofthelateralforceresistingsystem.
elementsofthelateralforceresistingsystem.
No. 3
HowLateralForcesFlowThroughaBuilding
2
3
No. 4
HowDiaphragmsWork?
Diaphragmscanbetreatedlikehorizontalgirders,spanning
betweenverticalelementsofthelateralforceresisting
system.
Thediaphragmactsasaweb ofthisgirderwhilechord
elementsattheedgesareprovidedtoresisttensileor
compressiveforcescausedbyflexure.
No. 5
GirderModel
No. 6
GirderModel Forces
No. 7
GirderModel Forces
No. 8
ClassificationofDiaphragmBehaviour
Rigid
Flexible
Semirigid
No. 9
DiaphragmBehaviour ForceDistribution
Rigiddiaphragms distributionofhorizontalforcestovertical
elementsinproportiontotheirrelativestiffness
Flexiblediaphragms distributionofhorizontalforcesto
verticalelementsisindependentoftheirrelativestiffness;
actlikeaseriesofsimplebeamsspanningbetweenvertical
elements
No. 10
RigidandFlexibleDiaphragms
flexible
rigid
No. 11
RigidandFlexible
Diaphragms:
Example
No. 12
DiaphragmBehaviour Deformations
Rigiddiaphragms deflectionsinsignificantwhen
comparedtothatofverticalelements
Flexiblediaphragms deflectionssignificantlylarge
whencomparedtothatofverticalelements
No. 13
DiaphragmRigidity
Arelativeproperty dependsonrelativerigidityofdiaphragmand
verticalelements
Ashortspandiaphragmcouldberigid,butalongspandiaphragmof
thesametypecouldbeflexible
Acompositesteel/concretedeckcouldberigidrelativetosteel
momentframebutflexiblerelativetoaconcreteshearwallsystem
Rigiditydeterminedbasedonbeamdeflections flexuralandshear
components
No. 14
SemiRigidDiaphragms
Whenthediaphragmdeflectionsandthedeflections
oftheverticalelementsarethesame,thenthe
diaphragmcannotbeassumedtobeeitherrigidor
flexible semirigid
No. 15
Hn
Lp
Rigid
Hp
Ln
Flexible
H |
Semi-rigid
Source: Naeim (2001)
No. 16
DiaphragmBehaviour
rigid
flexible
semi-rigid
No diaphragm is perfectly rigid or perfectly flexible

Reasonable assumptions can be made in order to simplify
the analysis
No. 17
SeismicForceDistributioninBuildings
withFlexibleDiaphragms
Theflexiblediaphragmshouldbedividedintosections
Eachsectionboundedbytwowallsinthedirectionof
theinertiaforces(preferablythewallswillbelocated
onthesidesofthesection)
No. 18
SeismicForceDistributioninBuildings
withFlexibleDiaphragms:AnExample
Twosections:theinertiaforcesfromsection1distributedtowalls
AandB
Section2consideredasabeamwithacantileverendextending
beyondwallC
Duetocantilever>highforceinWallCandaforcereductionin
WallB
No. 19
FlexibleDiaphragms
Changeshapewhensubjectedtolateralloads.
Maximumlateraldeflectionismorethantwotimes
theaveragestoreydrift.
Incapableoftransmittingtorsion.
Distributethediaphragmforcesinproportiontothe
tributaryareasofthediaphragmplan.
10
FlexibleDiaphragm LateralForceDistribution
Eachwallattractslateralforcesbasedontributaryareasratherthan
stiffness.
Example:
L1
L2
F1
F3
F2
F1
F2
Wall 1
Wall 3
F3
Wall 2
wL1
2
wL1
F1
2
wL2
2
wL2
2
Lateral Force w
FlexibleDiaphragms Deflections
tm
Am, Em
Floor/roofdiaph
'
td, Ed, Gd
d
MasonryWall
L1
6tm
L2
3
Flexural deflection:
4
'f
5 wL2
384 E m I m
Shear deflection:
2
's
wL 2
8Gd L1t d
Im
n
Am
t d L1
2 Am d 2
12
Ed
L1
d
Em
2
n
t u 6t
11
FlexibleDiaphragms Deflections
Total deflection due to flexural and shear effects:
'
' f 's
Note: flexural deflections are usually predominant in

flexible diaphragms
MasonryDamageDuetoFlexibleDiaphragms 2011NewZealand
Earthquake
Diaphragmflexibilityisimportant
Source:Credit:J.Ingham
K. Elwood
12
EffectofDiaphragmFlexibility 2011NewZealandEarthquake
Christchurch
(2010/2011)
Photocredit:D.Dizhur
DiaphragmDisplacements
Thesize(magnitude)ofdisplacementswoulddeterminewhetherthe
diaphragmshownonthefigureisrigidorflexible.
Ifthedisplacementsareexcessivelylarge,thediaphragmisflexible
andcannotbeusedwithsuchalayoutoftheSFRS
FlexiblediaphragmsrequirethattheSFRShasatleast2wallsineach
direction
No. 26
13
HowtoEstimateDiaphragmRigidity?
Consideranexampleofareinforcedconcrete(RC)shearwallbuilding
withRCdiaphragm
TrytoestimateratioR,where
y
x
=deflectionofdiaphragmrelativetoshearwall
=deflectionofshearwall
No. 27
SimpleShearWallBuilding PlanView
No. 28
14
RatioR

S 2 2 16 S 2 A 1 r A 12 32 A S 2
2
A 1 # A 1 32 A S 2
Where
Z
A D
ZS
Z D = natural frequency of floor diaphragm when shear walls

are assumed to be infinitely rigid (x = 0)
ZS
=natural frequency of the system when floor diaphragm is

assumed to be infinitely rigid (y = 0)
No. 29
RversusAChart
R
y
x
Source: Englekirk&Hart (1984)
Z
A D
ZS
No. 30
15
HowtoIdentifyRigid/Flexible
Diaphragm?
Theresponseofastructureconsistingofshearwallsanddiaphragms
dependsondynamiccharacteristicsofbothelements
Basedonthechart,wecanconcludethattheresponseofthesetwo
systemscanbeseparatedwhen
Z D ! 3Z S
(thatis,wecanconsiderthatthediaphragmisrigid)
No. 31
EstimatingFundamentalFrequency ShearWallSystem
Zs canbeestimatedusingthefollowingequation
(fora1storeybuilding)
Zs
g K walls
Wdiaphragm
ForMDOFsystems,Rayleighsmethodcanbe
used(forsimplercases)oracomputeranalysis
(e.g.SAP2000)
No. 32
16
EstimatingFundamentalFrequencyofaDiaphragm
Z D canbeestimatedusingthefollowingequation
ZD
S2
2
g E Ie
W
I e = effective moment of inertia for diaphragm

Ie
0.2 I g
1 3b L
Ig
t b3
12
No. 33
IrregularitiesinDiaphragms
Small openings (significantly smaller when compared to the
diaphragm size):
Adjustforincreased
shearflowalonglines
ofopenings
No. 34
17
DragStruts (Collectors)
transmitdiaphragm
reactionstoshearwallsat
pointsofdiscontinuity
(irregularity)inplan.
No. 35
DragStruts CommonApplications
Dragstrutsorcollectorsare
usedtoensure thatshear
forcescanbetransferred
throughthejunctionofLor
T.
Incompatible
Deflections
Irregularflexiblediaphragms&
incompatibledeflections.
LateralLoad(wkN/m)
18
FlexibleDiaphragms WithoutDragStruts
Lateralforcewithout strut.
WallA:
w(L1 +L2)/2
WallB:
WallC:
w(L1 +L2)/2
L2
L1
db
da
A
C dc
Lateral Load (w kN/m)
FlexibleDiaphragms WithDragStruts
Wall A: (wL1)/2
L2
L1
WallB: w(L1 +L2)/2

WallC: (wL2)/2
B
A
Maximumdragstrut forceissumof
C
theshearflowsfrombothsidesofthe
dragstrut,thus
Ts
wL L dc wL2
2 da 2
Drag Strut
19
IrregularitiesinDiaphragms:ReentrantCorners
ConsiderLshapeddiaphragmsastwospans:
Dragstrut:carriesendshearfromtheendspanthatdoesnthavea
supportandtoensurecompatibilitybetweenthepartsofthediaphragm
Chordextension:toenforcecontinuityofthetwospans
No. 39
EffectofDiaphragmFlexibilityUponSeismicResponseofURM
OutofPlaneWalls
ResearchPerformedatUBC,Canada(PennerandElwood)
Upperstoreywallconnectedtoflexiblediaphragms
Linear
diaphragm
inplane
response
Onewayspanning
OOPwallsegment
Rigidin
planewall
response
20
ShakeTableExperimentalTestingSetup UBCStudy
Topcarriage
Wall
Coilsprings
Rigidframe
Bottomcarriage
Shaketable
ExperimentalTestingSetup UBCStudy
21
FailureMechanism
CrackingandRocking
ExperimentalTesting:VariousEndSupportConditions
22
TestResults SpectralAccelerationversusLateralDisplacement
WallStability
1.0
FR3
FF2
0.8
Sa(1.0sec)(g)
FF3
0.6
SS3
RR3
0.4
ASCE41 maxallowablefortopstorey wallath/t=14
0.2
Staticinstabilitylimit
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
[Rockingdisplacement]/[wallthickness]
0.8
1.0
HowtoDetermineWallStiffness?
23
Acknowledgments
9 DurgeshRai,IITKanpur,India
9 C.V.R.Murty,IITJodhpur,India
9 SudhirJain,IITGandhinagar,India
9 OsmarPennerandKenElwood,UBC,Canada
9 RobertSchubak,BCHydro,Canada
No. 47
References
Naeim,F.(2001),TheSeismicDesignHandbook,SecondEdition,KluwerAcademicPublishers,
Boston.
Englekirk,R.E.(2003).SeismicDesignofReinforcedandPrecastConcreteBuildings,JohnWiley&
Sons,Inc.,NewJersey,USA.
Anderson,D.L.,andBrzev,S.(2009).SeismicDesignGuideforMasonryBuildings,Canadian
ConcreteMasonryProducersAssociation,Toronto,Canada(freedownloadavailableat
www.ccmpa.ca)
Stratta,J.L.(1987),ManualofSeismicDesign,PearsonEducation,Inc.,NewJersey,USA.
Penner,O.andElwood,K.(2013)ShakeTableStudyOnOutofplaneDynamicStabilityof
UnreinforcedMasonryWalls,Proceedingsofthe12th CanadianMasonrySymposium,
Vancover,Canada(thispaperisincludedinthecoursenotes).
No. 48
24
EXAMPLE 3: Seismic load distribution in a masonry building considering both rigid and
flexible diaphragm alternatives1
Consider a single-storey commercial building located in Nanaimo, BC on a Class C site. The
building plan and relevant elevations are shown on the figure below. The building has an open
north-west faade consisting mostly of glazing. The roof elevation is at 4.8 m above the
foundation. The roof structure is supported by 240 mm reinforced block masonry walls and steel
columns on the north-west side. Masonry properties should be determined based on 20 MPa
block strength and Type S mortar (use f mc of 10.0 MPa). Grade 400 steel has been used for the
reinforcement.
Masonry walls should be treated as conventional construction according to NBCC 2005 and
CSA S304.1. A preliminary seismic design has shown that the total seismic base shear force for
the building is equal to V 700 kN. This force was determined based on the total seismic
weight W of 2340 kN and the seismic coefficient equal to 0.3, that is, V 0.3W .
This example will determine the seismic forces in the N-S walls ( Y1 to Y3 ) due to seismic force
acting in the N-S direction for the following two cases:
a) Rigid roof diaphragm (consider torsional effects), and
b) Flexible roof diaphragm.
Finally, the wall forces obtained in parts a) and b) will be compared and the differences will be
discussed.
Note that both flexible and rigid diaphragms are considered to have the same weight, although
this would be unlikely in a real design application. Also, the columns located on the north-west
side are neglected in the seismic design calculations.
Specified loads:
roof = 3.5 kPa
25% snow load = 0.6 kPa
wall weight = 5.38 kPa (240 mm blocks solid grouted; this is a conservative assumption)
Source: Seismic Design Guide for Masonry Buildings by D. Anderson and S. Brzev, Chapter 4, CCMPA,
Canada (free download available at www.ccmpa.ca)
4/1/2009
4-22
SOLUTION:
a) Rigid diaphragm
Torsional moment (torque) is a product of the seismic force and the eccentricity between the
centre of resistance ( C R ) and the centre of mass ( C M ). The coordinates of the centre of mass
will be determined taking into account the influence of wall masses, the upper half of which are
supported laterally by the roof. The calculations are summarized in Table 1 below. Note that the
centroid of the roof area is determined by dividing the roof plan into two rectangular sections.
Table 1. Calculation of the Centre of Mass ( C M )
Wall
X1
X2
Y1
Y2
Y3
Roof 1
Roof 2
4/1/2009
Wi
(kN)
387
116
232
52
116
1107
332
2343
Xi
(m)
15.00
25.50
21.00
30.00
30.00
15.00
25.50
Yi
(m)
0.00
18.00
9.00
2.00
13.50
4.50
13.50
Wi * X i
5810
2963
4880
1548
3486
16605
8466
43759
Wi * Yi
0
2092
2092
103
1569
4982
4482
15319
4-23
The C M coordinates have been determined from the table as follows (see the figure below):
W * X
W
i
xCM
43757.02
2343.86
18.68 m
W * Y
W
i
y CM
15324.38
2343.86
6.54 m
Next, the coordinates of the

centre of resistance ( C R ) will
be determined. Wall X 1 has
several openings and the
overall wall stiffness is
determined using the method
explained in Section C.3.3 by
considering the deflections of
the following components for a
unit load (see the figure on the
next page):
x solid wall with 4.8 m height
and 30 m length cantilever
( ' solid )
x an interior strip with 1.6 m
height (equal to the opening
height) and 30 m length
cantilever ( ' strip )
x piers A, B, C, and D cantilevered ( ' ABCD ) (the stiffness of the piers A, B, C, and D is
summed and the inverse taken as ' ABCD )
The stiffness of each component is based on the following equation for the cantilever model by
using appropriate height-to-length ratios (see Section C.3.2), that is,
4/1/2009
4-24
K
Em * t
h h
4
3
l l
The overall wall deflection is determined from the combined pier deflections, as follows:
' X1
' solid ' strip ' ABCD
Note that the strip deflection is subtracted from the solid wall deflections - this removes the
entire portion of the wall containing all the openings, which is then replaced with the deflection
of the four piers.
Finally, the stiffness of the wall X 1 is equal to the reciprocal of the deflection (see Table 2), as
follows
K X1
1
' X1
1.71
Table 2. Wall X 1 Stiffness Calculations

Wall
Solid
Opening
strip
X1A
X1B
X1C
X1D
(m)
0.24
(m)
4.8
(m)
30.0
End
conditions
cant
0.160
2.015
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
30.0
6.2
6.2
6.2
3.0
cant
cant
cant
cant
cant
0.053
0.258
0.258
0.258
0.533
6.226
1.186
1.186
1.186
0.453
-0.161
4.012
0.249
0.585
hl
(ABCD)
K (E * t)
Displacement
0.496
K final ( E * t )
1.709
The stiffness of wall Y1 is determined in the same manner (see the figure below). The
calculations are summarized in Table 3.
4/1/2009
4-25
Table 3. Wall Y1 Stiffness Calculations
(m)
0.24
(m)
4.8
(m)
18
0.24
0.24
0.24
2.4
2.4
2.4
18
8
9
Wall
Solid
Opening
strip
Pier E
Pier F
End
conditions
hl
K (E * t)
Displacement
cant
0.267
1.142
0.876
cant
cant
cant
0.133
0.300
0.267
sum(EF)
2.442
0.992
1.142
2.134
-0.409
0.469
0.935
K final ( E * t )
1.070
Next, the centre of resistance ( C R ) will be determined, and the calculations are presented in
Table 4.
Table 4. Calculation of the Centre of Resistance ( C R )
(m)
(m)
(m)
4.8
cant
0.53
4.8
4.8
4
9
cant
cant
1.20
0.53
Wall
X1
X2
Y1
Y2
Y3
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
End
cond.
hl
K
E *t
1.709*
0.453
1.070**
0.095
0.453
Kx
Ky
Xi
Yi
(kN/m)
(kN/m)
(m)
(m)
3.49E+06
9.24E+05
0
0
0
4.41E+06
0
0
2.18E+06
1.94E+05
9.24E+05
3.30E+06
15
25.5
21
30
30
0
18
0
0
0
Ky * Xi
K x * Yi
0.00E+00
1.66E+07
4.58E+07
5.82E+06
2.77E+07
7.94E+07
1.66E+07
Notes:
* - see Table 2
** - see Table 3
Note that all walls and piers in this example were modeled as cantilevers (fixed at the base and
free at the top). For more discussion related to modelling of masonry walls and piers for seismic
loads see Section C.3. The modulus of elasticity for masonry is taken as E m 8.5*106 kPa
(corresponding to f mc of 10 MPa).
The C R coordinates can be determined as follows (see the figure below):
K *x
K
K * y
K
yi
xCR
yi
7.94 * 10 7
3.30 *10 6
24.05 m
1.66 * 10 7
4.41 * 10 6
3.77 m
xi
y CR
xi
Next, the eccentricity needs to be determined. Since we are considering the seismic load effects
in the N-S direction, we need to determine the actual eccentricity in the x-direction ( e x ), that is,
e x xCR xCM 24.05 18.68 5.37 m
4/1/2009
4-26
In addition, an accidental eccentricity needs to be considered, as follows:

ea r0.1Dnx r0.1 * 30 r3.0 m
The total maximum eccentricity in
the x-direction assumes the
following two values depending on
the sign of the accidental
eccentricity, that is,
e x1 e x ea 5.37 3.0 8.37 m
ex2
e x ea
5.37 3.0
2.37 m
The torsional moment is determined

as a product of the shear force and
the eccentricity, that is,
T1 V * e x1 700 * 8.37 | 5860 kNm
T2
V * ex2
700 * 2.37 | 1660 kNm
The seismic force in each wall can be determined as the sum of the two components:
translational (no torsional effects) and torsional, that is,
Vi
Vio Vit
where
Vio
Vit
V*
Ki
translational component
Ki
T * ci
* K i torsional component
J
2
2
K xi c xi K yi c yi 2.97 *108 torsional rigidity (see Table 5)
c xi , c yi - distance of the wall

centroid from the centre of
resistance ( C R )
The calculation of translational
and torsional forces is presented
in Table 5. Translational and
torsional force components due
to the eccentricity e x1 and the
torsional moment T1 are shown
on the figure. Note that the
torque T1 causes rotation in the
same direction like the force V
(showed by the dashed line)
around point C R (this is
illustrated on Figure 1-18). The
wall forces shown on the
diagram are in the directions to
resist the shear V and torque T1 ,
thus on wall Y1 the translational
4/1/2009
4-27
force and torsional force act in the same direction, while in walls Y2 and Y3 these forces act in
the opposite direction. The calculation of the forces is presented in Table 5 where the sign
convention has horizontal wall forces positive to the left and vertical forces positive down,
resulting in negative values for the torsional forces in walls X1, Y2 and Y3.
Table 5. Seismic Shear Forces in the Walls due to Seismic Load in the N-S Direction
Wall
Ki
ci
K i * ci
(1)
(kN/m)
(2)
(m)
(3)
(4)
X1
X2
3.49E+06
9.24E+05
-3.77
14.23
4.96E+07
1.87E+08
3.05
-5.95
-5.95
2.03E+07
6.87E+06
3.27E+07
Ky
K
(5)
Vo
V1t
V1total
V2 t
V2total
V govern
(kN)
(6)
(kN)
(7)
(kN)
(8)
(kN)
(9)
(kN)
(10)
(kN)
(11)
-260
260
-260
260
-74
74
-74
74
260
260
131
-23
-109
594
18
87
37
-6
-31
500
35
165
594
35
165
4.41E+06
Y1
Y2
Y3
2.18E+06
1.94E+05
9.24E+05
y
3.30E+06
* ci
0.66
0.06
0.28
463
41
196
1.00
700
2.97E+08
It should be noted that there are two total seismic forces for each wall in the N-S direction
(corresponding to torsional moments T1 and T2 ) see columns (8) and (10) in Table 5. The
governing force to be used for design is equal to the larger of these two forces, as shown in
column (11) of Table 5. Note that, in some cases, torsional forces have a negative sign and
cause a reduction in the total seismic force, like in the case of walls Y2 and Y3.
b) Flexible diaphragm
It is assumed in this example that flexible diaphragms are not capable of transferring significant
torsional forces to the walls perpendicular to the direction of the inertia forces. Therefore, the
wall forces are determined as diaphragm reactions, assuming that diaphragms D1 and D2 act
as beams spanning between the walls, as shown on the figure below. The diaphragm loads
include the inertia loads of the walls supported laterally by the diaphragm. The SFRS wall inertia
forces are added to the forces supporting the diaphragms to get the total wall load. The seismic
coefficient of 0.3 will be used in these calculations (as defined at the beginning of this example).
Shear forces in the walls Y1a and Y2 (diaphragm D1):
Seismic force in the diaphragm D1 is due to the roof seismic weight and the wall X 1 inertia
load:
V D1
0.3 * >(9m * 30m) * (3.5kPa 0.6kPa ) 2.4m * 30m * 5.38kPa @ 448kN
The diaphragm is considered as a beam with the reactions at the locations of walls Y1a and Y2 ,
that is,
RY 1a
448kN *15m 9m
747kN
and
RY 2
V D1 RY 1a
448 747
299kN (opposite direction from RY 1a is required to satisfy
equilibrium)
The total force in each wall is obtained when the wall inertia load is added to the diaphragm
reaction, that is,
4/1/2009
4-28
RY 1a Vw 747 0.3 * 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa 782kN

RY 2 Vw 299 0.3 * 2.4m * 4m * 5.38kPa 284kN (note: this force has opposite
direction from force VY 1a )
VY 1a
VY 2
Shear forces in the walls Y1b and Y3 (diaphragm D2):

Seismic force in the diaphragm D2 is due to the roof seismic weight and the wall X 2 inertia
load:
VD 2
0.3 * >(9m * 9m) * (3.5kPa 0.6kPa) 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa @ 134.5kN
The diaphragm is considered as a beam with the reactions at the locations of walls Y1b and Y3 ,
that is,
4/1/2009
4-29
RY 1b
RY 3
134.5 / 2
67.3kN
The total force in each wall is obtained when the wall inertia load is added to the diaphragm
reaction, that is,
VY 1b RY 1b Vw 67 0.3 * 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa 102kN

VY 3 RY 3 Vw 67 0.3 * 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa 102kN
Total shear force in wall Y1 :
The total seismic force in the wall Y1 is equal to
VY 1
VY 1a VY 1b
782 102
884kN
Shear forces in walls Y2 and Y3 :

The total shear force in the combined walls Y2 and Y3 is equal to
VY 23
VY 2 VY 3
284 102
182kN
This force will then be distributed to these walls in proportion to the wall stiffness, as follows (the
wall stiffnesses are presented in Table 4):
VY 2
VY 3
KY 2
1.94 * 10 5
* VY 23
* (182)
KY 2 KY 3
1.94 *10 5 9.24 *10 5
VY 23 VY 2 182 (32) 150kN
0.17 * (182)
32kN
The comparison
Shear forces in the walls Y1 to Y3 obtained in parts a) and b) of this example are summarized
on the figure below. A comparison of the shear forces is presented in Table 6.
Table 6. Shear Forces in the Walls Y1 to Y3 for Rigid and Flexible Diaphragms
Y1
Shear forces (kN)

Rigid diaphragm
Flexible diaphragm
(part a)
(part b)
594
972 (884)
Y2
35
35 (32)
Y3
165
165 (150)
Wall
4/1/2009
4-30
Note that, for the flexible diaphragm case, values in the brackets are actual forces. These
values are increased by 10 % to account for accidental eccentricity.
It can be observed from the table that the flexible diaphragm assumption results in the same
seismic forces for the walls Y2 and Y3 , and an increase in the wall Y1 force.
Deflection calculations
A fundamental question related to diaphragm design is: when should a diaphragm be modeled
as a rigid or a flexible one? This is discussed in Section 1.5.9.4. A possible way for comparing
the extent of diaphragm flexibility is through deflections. The deflection calculations for the rigid
and flexible diaphragm case are presented below.
x Rigid diaphragm (see Example 2, step 8 for a similar calculation)
The deflection will be calculated for point A as this should be the maximum. First, a reduction in
the wall stiffness to account for the effect of cracking will be determined following the approach
presented in Section C.3.5. The reduced stiffness will be determined for wall Y2 according to
equation (15) from Section C.3.5, that is,
Pf
100
(

)K c
fy
f mc Ae
K ce
where
K c is the elastic uncracked stiffness
Pf
9.0 * 9.0 2 * 3.5 142 kN (axial force due to dead load in wall X 2 )
240 *10 ) * 9.0
216 *10 4 mm2 (effective cross sectional area for 240 mm block wall,
solid grouted, length 9.0 m; see Table D-1 for Ae values for the unit wall length)
f mc =10.0 MPa
f y 400 MPa (Grade 400 steel)
Ae
thus
K ce
100
142 *10 3

)K c
400 10.0 * 216 * 10 4
0.26 K c
Next, the translational displacement at point A can be calculated as follows:
V
0.26 K Y
'A 0
700kN
0.26 * 3.3 * 10 6 kN / m
0.82mm
Subsequently, the torsional displacement at point A will be determined. Torsional rotation of the
building T can be found from the following equation:
T
J
5860kNm
0.26 * 297 *10 6
7.59 *10 5 rad
where (see the torsional calculations performed in part a) of this example)

T 5860 kNm torsional moment
J 297 * 10 6
elastic torsional stiffness (this value is reduced by 0.5 to take into account
the cracking in the walls)
The torsional displacement at point A:
'A t
T * xA
4/1/2009
7.59 *10 5 * 24.05m 1.82mm
4-31
The total displacement at point A is can be found as follows (note that the displacements need
to be multiplied by Rd Ro I E ratio, where I E = 1.0):
'
'A max
' A t * R d Ro
0.82 1.82 *1.5 *1.5
6.0mm
x Flexible diaphragm
As a first approximation the calculation will consider a 21 m long diaphragm portion as a
cantilever beam subjected to the total shear force equal to:
VD
0.3 * >(9m * 21m) * (3.5kPa 0.6kPa) 2.4m * 21m * 5.38kPa @ 314kN
and the equivalent uniform load is equal to

v D V D L 15.0 kN/m
where
L 21.0 m diaphragm length for the cantilevered portion
The real deflection will be larger since the diaphragm acting as a cantilever is not fully fixed at
the wall Y1 , and walls Y1 , Y2 , and Y3 also deflect; both effects provide some rotation at the fixed
end of the cantilever.
Consider a plywood diaphragm with the following properties:
E 1500 MPa plywood modulus of elasticity
G 600 MPa plywood shear modulus
t D 25.4 mm (1 plywood thickness)
b * tD
9.0m * 0.0254m
0.23 m2
Let us assume that the two courses of grouted bond beam block act as a chord member, as
shown on the figure. The roof-to-wall connection is achieved by means of nails driven into the
anchor plate and hooked steel anchors welded to the plate embedded into the masonry. The
corresponding moment of inertia around the centroid of the diaphragm can be found as follows:
b
2 * Ac *
2
9.0
2 * 0.096 *
3.89 m4
where
Ac
2 * (0.24m * 0.2m)
0.096 m2
chord area (two grouted 240 mm blocks)
masonry modulus of elasticity based on f mc = 10.0 MPa (solid grouted 20

MPa blocks and Type S mortar)
Em
8.5 * 10 kPa
4/1/2009
4-32
The total displacement at point A is equal to the combination of flexural and shear component,
that is,
4
v D * L4 1.2V D * L
15.0 * 21.0
1.2 * 314 * 21.0
11.0 29.0 * 10 3 40 * 10 3 m 40mm
'A

6
8E * I
2 * A * G 8 * 8.5 * 10 * 3.89 2 * 0.23 * 600 * 10 3
The total displacement at point A is can be found by multiplying the above displacement by
Rd Ro I E ratio, that is,
'A max
' A * R d Ro
40 *1.5 * 1.5
90mm
A quick check of the additional deflection caused by rotation at the fixed end of the cantilever
indicates that an additional 50 mm could be expected at point A. Thus the total displacement
would be about 140 mm.
By comparing the displacements for the rigid and flexible diaphragm model, it can be observed
that the difference is significant:
'A max 6mm rigid diaphragm model
'A max 90mm flexible diaphragm model
Had the flexible diaphragm been used, the lateral drift ratio at point A would be equal to:
DR
' max
hw
90
4800
0.019 1.9 %
The drift is within the NBCC 2005 limit of 2.5% (see Section 1.5.11); however, a flexible
diaphragm would not be an ideal solution for this design a rigid diaphragm would be the
preferred solution.
Discussion
In this example, seismic forces were determined for the N-S walls due to seismic load acting in
the N-S direction. It should be noted, however, that there is a significant eccentricity causing
torsional effects in the E-W walls due to seismic load acting in the E-W direction these
calculations were not included in this example.
4/1/2009
4-33

Acknowledgement
Anderson and Brzev, Seismic design guide
for masonry building
Course materials previously prepared by
Profs D C Rai, S K Jain and C V R Murthy
Irregularities
Plan Irregularities
Torsional Irregularity
Heavy Mass
CR
CM
Stiffnesseccentric
Masseccentric
Floor
2
2 1.2 1
2
2
Wheredowe
applytheload?
Plan Irregularities
Diaphragm Irregularities
Openings
Opening
Opening
Flexible floor diaphragm
Plan Irregularities
Torsion with Flexible Floor
Diaphragm
Plan Irregularities
Re-entrant Corners or Horizontal

Setbacks
A
L
A
L
A
0.15 0.20
L
Plan Irregularities
Re-entrant Corners with Flexible
Floor Diaphragm
Plan Irregularities
Topic 1
Topic 2
Topic 3
Vertical Irregularities
A
A
0.15 0.20
L
L
A
A
L
Vertical Irregularities
L1
L2 1.5 L1
L2
Wall with Openings
Lateral Torsional Coupling
One Story Torsionally Coupled

System
Flexible side
Side A
Stiff Side
Side B
Elastic
response is
characterized
by
y =U n cou p led T ran slation al F req u en cy
U n cou p led T orsion al to T ran slation al F req u en cy R atio
e b N orm alized (A ctu al) E ccen tricity
Torsionally Coupled
Torsionally flexible system
Flexible side elements are critical
Torsionally stiff system
Stiff side elements are critical
Same lateral stiffness
Seismic Code Provisions

Lateral load profile should be applied at an
offset equals to design eccentricity (wrt a
reference point)
edj
esj b j
esj b j
IS 1893( I ): =1.5; 1.0, 0.05
Reference Point: Center of Rigidity (CR),

Shear Center (SC)
According to IS 1893(1): CR
Definition of CR?
Not self explanatory
Accidental Torsion
Accidental torsion accounts for
All uncertain structural sources that contribute
to torsional response
Torsional ground motion
Taken into account in design eccentricity

Percentage of building dimension normal to
the ground motion---accidental eccentricity
5% as per IS 1893 (1)
Dynamic Amplification
Dynamic eccentricity
Dynamic torsional moment
at base divide by base shear
Dynamic amplification is the

ratio of dynamic to static
eccentricity
Maximum amplification is
often greater than 1.0
Multiplier of static
eccentricity in design
eccentricity equations is due
to dynamic amplification
Definition of Reference Point

Center of Rigidity
(Single Floor)
CR of a floor is a
point on the floor
such that application
of any lateral load
through this point
does not produce
any rotation in that
floor while any other
floors can rotate
Independent of
applied load
Jth floordoes
notrotate
(othersmay
rotate)
Reference Point
Center of Rigidity
(All Floor
Definition)
CR are the set of
points located one on
each floor such that
application of lateral
load profile would
cause no rotation in
any of the floors.
Location depends on
the applied load profile
No
rotation
inany
floor
10
Reference Point
Shear Center
When lateral load profile is applied through
All floor CR, SC at any story is the point
through resultant (cumulative) shear force
passes
Lateral load profile dependent
Reference Point
All three reference points are one and the
same in case of single story building
Differ in case of multistory building (except a
special case)
11
No-Torsion Case
Lateral load profile is applied through all floor CR
Orthogonal buildings
CR
CR
Non-orthogonal buildings
CR
CR
Roller-Model for Torsional

Provisions (Goel and Chopra)
12
Roller Model
Design Response
Fd FCR FCM FCR RAC

Fd FCR FCM FCR RAC
Noneedto
locateCR
explicitly!!!
FCR
CR
CM
ViolatesNoTorsion
ConditionforNon
OrthogonalBuildings
Locating the Reference Points

Single floor CR
13
Locating Ref Points

Single floor CR
Jth floordoes
notrotate
(othersmay
rotate)
Locating Ref Points

All floor CR
14
Locating Ref Points

All floor CR
Locating Ref Points

Shear Center
Follows from No-torsion condition of all floor
CR case
15
Locating Ref Points

Example:1RC Building
Topic 2
Topic 3
Wall-1: 0.2m thick

Other three walls: 0.15m thick
All columns: 0.4m by 0.4m
All beams: 0.23m by 0.35m
Slab thickness: 0.125m
Floor
5
4
3
2
1
Force (kn)
339
280
157
70
17
IS1893(1)
Locating Ref Points

AllFloorCR
Floor Level
Ground Floor
1st Floor
2nd Floor
3rd Floor
4th Floor
Floor Level
GF
1st Floor
2nd Floor
3rd Floor
4th Floor
Rotation
-2.39502E-05
-6.41559E-05
-0.000103661
-0.000135342
-0.000155053
GF
3.67107E-08
5.37243E-08
5.37202E-08
5.81077E-08
5.83039E-08
8.861362188
0.507
32.52863022
0.465
0.497
0.480
0.485
78.20957937
134.1380299
164.6531092
WRTOriginatthe
geometricc.g and
inmeter
Unit Roations and resp values on each floor

1st Floor
2nd Floor
3rd Floor
5.37243E-08 5.73202E-08
5.81077E-08
1.28058E-07 1.53051E-07
1.58416E-07
1.53051E-07 2.36347E-07
2.63403E-07
1.58416E-07 2.63403E-07
3.49071E-07
1.59697E-07 2.69595E-07
3.78068E-07
4th Floor
5.83039E-08
1.59697E-07
2.69595E-07
3.78068E-07
4.70948E-07
16
Locating Ref Points

SingleFloorCR
-3.11E-07
3.67E-08
-4.34E-06
1.28E-07
-2.00E-05
2.36E-07
-5.00E-05
3.49E-07
-8.00E-05
4.71E-07
0.484
8.5
0.484
33.8
84.6
143.2
169.9
0.538
0.512
WRTOriginatthe
geometricc.g and
inmeter
0.500
AllfloorCRandSingleFloorCRsdonotdiffergreatlyin
thisproblem
Lateral Load Distribution

Example-2: RC Building: (Ref: EESD, 2007, 36, pp.965-973)
Roofplan
1st and2nd Floorplan
17

Lateral load profile is calculated per IS 1893
(1) and used in this problem
Floor/story All Floor CR
Single Floor
CR
Shear Center
(All)
4.56
3.52
4.56
-28.56
-4.73
-11.24
35.01
-3.39
-4.3
Location of reference points greatly differ

with definitions
All floor CR may lie also outside the building

Comparison of Wall Shear Force
All floor CR and SC (All story) are consistent
18

Example-3: Masonry Building
(Ref. Canadian design guide,
CCMPA, 2009)
BuildinglocatedinVancouver
1st FloorcommercialwithRC
flooring
OtherFloorsresidentialwith
lighterfloorsystem
200mmblocksforNSwalls&
300mmforEWwalls.
Fm =10MPa,400gradesteel.
Buildingofnormalimportance
supportedonsoiltype C
Building Description
SpecifiedFloorloads:
Rooflevel:3Kpa
2nd &3rd floor:4kpa
1st floor:6kpa
Snowload:0.25Kpa
ToFind:
ForcesinEWwalls
1.WithoutTorsion
2.WithTorsion
19
CanadianGuide
CalculateSeismicWeightofbuilding
W=10350KN
FindBaseShear
S (Ta ) * M v * I E
*W
Rd * Ro
DeriveResponseSpectraspecifictogivensite
V
S(Ta)=Sa*Fa (or)Fv
Fa,Fv =SitespecificFactors,Valuesdependon
levelofseismichazard&SiteClass
Rd&Ro=Forcereductionfactors
IE & Mv =Importance&Heigher modefactorresp
DistributionofBaseShearovertheheight
Fi
Wi * h i
*V
Wi * h i
CanadianGuide
S(T), g
V=2898kN
Distribution
(vertical
plane)
1.00
Comparison for Spectra

Spectra for soil type
C as per Canadian
code
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
T (sec)
Storey
hi(m)
Wi (KN)
Wi*hi
Fi (KN)
Vi(KN)
4
3
2
1
14
11
8
5
1802.2
2484.4
2484.4
3579.2
10350.2
25230.8
27328.4
19875.2
17896
90330.4
809
877
638
574
2898
809
1686
2324
2898
20
CanadianGuide
Effective height
he
M
V
28980
2898
he 10 m
he
CanadianGuide
UsingEffectiveHeight,
Calculatestiffnessofeachwall
CalculateCentreofResistance(CR)
CalculateCentreofMass(CM)
Calculatestaticeccentricity:es =CR CM
Designeccentricity
edi1 estatic (0.1* D)

edi1=7.72medi2=3.72m
21
CanadianGuide
UsingEccentricitiescalculateTorsion
T1=V* edi1=22373.2KNm
T2=V*edi2 =10780.97KNm
Calculateforcesinwalls:
Seismicforce
dueto
duetotorsion
ina= Translational+
component
wall
component
CanadianGuide
Vi Vix Vit
Vix V *
Ki
Ki
Vit
Ti * ci
* Ki
J
22
CanadianGuide
For
For
Vtotal
(KN)
Wall Vix (KN) Vit (KN)

X1
X2
Y1
Y2
1449
1449
155
155
1067
1067
Vix (KN) Vit (KN) Vtotal (KN)
1294
1604
1067
1067
1449
1449
74.6
74.6
514.2
514.2
1374.3
1523.7
514.2
514.2
CanadianGuide
Calculatemaximumdesignforceinwall:
Reductioninwallforceduetotorsional
componentisignored.
()*= Maxforceconsideringreductiondueto
torsion
Wall
Force(KN)
Force*(KN)
X1
1449.00
1374.33
X2
1603.96
1603.96
Y1
1067.06
1067.06
Y2
1067.06
1067.06
23
CanadianGuide
Height wise distribution of wall shear
Wall
Vtotal(KN)
wi*hi
X1
X2
Y1
Y2
1449
1604
1067
1067
90330
90330
90330
90330
4thFloor
(kN)
405
448
298
298
3rd
(kN)
438
485
323
323
2nd
(kN)
319
353
235
235
1st
(kN)
287
318
211
211
Indian Code
Type IIsoilSoil classC
(Indiancode)(Canadiancode)
BaseshearcalculatedbasedontypeIIsoil.
IndiancodeprocedurevariesfromCandian
procedurein,
1.Heightwisedistributionofbaseshear
2.Designeccentricity.
3.Wall stiffness
24
Indian Code
SeismicWeight=10350KN
Calculationofbaseshear:
Comparison for Spectra
1.00
Spectra for medium

soils*PGA
0.80
Spectra for soil type C

as per Canadian code
0.40
Spectra for hard soils *

PGA
S(T)
0.60
S
Z
I
*
* a *W
R
g
2
0.20
0.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
T (sec)
3.00
Z=Zonefactor=0.36(forzoneV)
I=ImportanceFactor=1.0
R=Responsereductionfactor=1.8(increasedby
20%toaccountforreinforcedmasonry)
Sa/g=2.5
V=2587.55KN
4.00
Indian Code
DistributionofBaseshear:
Wi * h i2
Fi
*V
Wi * h i2
Storey
hi(m)
Wi(KN)
Wi*hi2
Fi(KN)
Vi(KN)
4
3
2
1
14
11
8
5
1802.2
2484.4
2484.4
3579.2
10350.2
353231.2
300612.4
159001.6
89480
902325.2
1013
862
456
257
2588
1013
1875
2331
2588
25
Indian Code
Wallstiffnesscalculationisbasedonstoryheight,
notthefullheight
Storystiffness
CR ateachfloor/story
Calculateeccentricityateachflooras
e(static) =CR CM
Designeccentricityisgivenby:
1. edi1 *estatic 0.05*bi
2. edi 2 estatic 0.05*bi
Indian Code
Torsional moment at each story
Floor
4th
3rd
2nd
1st
T1=Fi*edi1
(KNm)
10276.22
8501.09
4496.44
2632.33
T2=Fi*edi2
(KNm)
5162.58
4230.64
2237.69
1327.22
Seismicforce
dueto
duetotorsion
ina= Translational+
component
wall
component
26
Indian Code
Wall shear
Wall
4th
X1
X1*
X2
Y1
Y2
506
414
618
443
477
Floor
MaximumforceKN)
3rd
2nd
431
385
523
391
394
228
204
277
207
209
1st
129
116
154
116
123
For Comparison
Baseshear&distributionbasedonIndiancode.
Wallstiffnessisbasedonoverall(effective)height
ofbuilding
CRbasedthiswallstiffness
DesignEccentricitybasedonIndiancode
Distributionofbaseshearintowallsaccounting
fortorsion
Heightwisedistributionofwallforcesbasedon
IndianCode
MixedMethod
27
For Comparison
ForwallX1
5
4
StoreyNo.
3
Canadiancodemethod
MixedMethod
indiancodemethod
0
0
100
200
300
Force(KN)
400
500
600
For Comparison
ForwallX2
5
StoreyNo.
4
3
Canadiancodemethod
2
MixedMethod
indiancodemethod
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Force(KN)
28
For Comparison
Distribution of base shear in Floors
5
Storey No.
4
3
2
aspercanadian
code
asperindian
standards
0
0
200
400
600
800
Force (KN)
1000
1200
For Comparison
Wall stiffness based on story height leads
to higher design shear
Which wall stiffness to be used?
Relative rigidity of diaphragm to in-plane
stiffness
In Indian practice, diaphragms are relatively
stiffer than what is used in Canadian practice
29
Flexible Floor Diaphragm
Flexible Floor Diaphragm

In-plane floor
flexibility
With or without
torsion
When to consider?
IS:1893(1)
B
1.5 A
30
V-shape Building
V-shape RC Building
Infill walls are not modeled
Topic 3
V-shape Building
Rigid floor mode
31
V-shape Building
Flexible floor mode
Topic 2
V-shape Building
Flexible floor mode (plan view)
Flapping of the wings
32
Long and Narrow Building

Flexible floor diaphragm with torsion
JSE, ASCE, Vol 30, No 8, pp 1169-1176
No-Torsion ConditionAll Floor CR
33
No-Torsion ConditionSingle Floor CR
Inertial Force Distribution
34
Implementation of Accidental
Torsion
Design Response
Calculate Design Response
Whichever is higher (in magnitude)
35
Example
Details are in the same Ref
RC Building
Example
Flexible
floor
diaphragm
Torsion
36
Example
Minimizing Floor Flexibility Effect

How to minimize floor flexibility effect?
Dynamically Separable Building
Proportion such that individual frame has
proportional eigenvalue problem
Modal mass participation of flexible floor
modes will be nearly ZERO against spatially
uniform ground motion
37
Example
Ref. JSE/ASCE, Vol 135, No.3, 2009, pp
873-877
V-shape RC building
Infill walls are not considered
Example
38
Example
Walls with Opening
39
Failure Pattern
Cracking
Ref.
KSCE/2011,15(2),
pp 281-293
Existing
Proposed
Discretization
Crack pattern
40
Sub-assemblage
ContinuumformulationbasedonEulerBernoullibeam
Sub-Topic
41
Example
Example
123:parallel(simpleadd);45parallel;Thesetwoareinseries:12345;Equivalent
isinparallelwith6;Thisisinserieswiththeparallelset7891011
Questions?
42
OverviewofAnalysisApproachesfor
MultiStoreyMasonryBuildings

Overview of analysis
Staticmethods
Approximatecalculationoflateralforces
Distributionoflateralforcesbetweenwalls
Simplifiedmethod(symmetricstructures)
Staticmethodincludetorsion
Strutandtiemethod,forcomplexpathofforceswithheigh
Forlongplantbuildings,temperatureanalysis
Dynamicmethods
Simultaneouscalculationanddistributionofforces
ModellingmethodsforWalls
Widecolumn
Finiteelements
ModellingofDiaphragm
Rigiddiaphragm
Flexiblediaphragmwithfiniteelements
Overview of analysis
Frameswithinfillwalls
Modellingofinfillwalls
Equivalentdiagonalmethod
Simplifiedmethod
Calculationsareeasilycarried
outbyhandorbyusinga
spreadsheetprogram
Assumerigiddiaphragm
Thebuildingissymmetric,as
notorsionisconsidered
Additionalrestrictionsforits
applicationareneeded,asno
overturningmomentis
considered.
Allwallsfailsimultaneously
Theforcesinthewallsare
proportionaltheircross
sectionalarea
Static method
Themethodallowsasymmetry
Considerrigiddiaphragm
Shearforcesduetotorsionshouldbecalculated
Effectsofoverturningmoment,areusually
ignored
5
Widecolumn
Transformedsection
Analysisiscarriedoutwithcommercialprogram.
If3D,torsionisconsideredduetoasymmetryof
resistingelements,noaccidentaltorsionaleffects
areconsideredautomatically.Fullmodaland
spectralanalysiscanbecarriedout.
WidecolumnIsamethodformodelling
Planesectionshypothesisisenforcedusingrigid
elements
Recoveringelementforcesisdirect
Nogoodforcomplexforcetransmission
Example:twofloorhouse
Firstlevelwalls:acriticalpointforthefoundationslabisindicated
ExampleWideColumn
Firstfloor
Example WideColumn
Crosssection
Examplewidecolumn
Fullmodelwithfoundationslabmodelledwithfiniteelementsoverspringsto
understandreinforcementneedsoftheslab
Examplewidecolumn
Deformedshapesofsometransversesections,acriticalpointismarked
Axis4
Axis 3
Axis 2
Examplewidecolumn
BendingmomentsintheXdirection
Examplewidecolumn
BendingmomentsintheYdirection
Finiteelements
Analysisiscarriedoutwithcommercial
program
Noplanarsectionisassumed
Canrepresentdeformationinsidethe
walls
Betterformodellingcomplextransmission
ofload
Ingeneralisrobustmethod
Recoveringforcesfordesignistime
consuming
Strutandtie
Wellsuitedforcomplexload
transmission
Usuallyfor2D
Theloadstobetransmitted
needtobecalculated
elsewhere
Betterformodellingcomplex
transmissionofload
Ingeneralisrobustmethod
Recoveringforcesfordesignis
timeconsuming
Strutandtie
Themethodisusuallycarried
outwithhandcalculations
Thestructureisviewedasa
truss
Withelementsincompression
struts
Andelementsintensionties
Forcesarecalculatedinthe
elementsbyenforcing
equilibrium,nodebynode
Infillwalls
Uncracked wall
0.35
0.22
Crackedwall
w
0.19 0.03
0.0035
0.005
Lateralforces
Equationsofmotion
u3
m3
Q3
k3
u2
Q2
m2
k2
Massmatrix
Q1
m1
k1
1
1
1
Stiffnessmatrix
k3 u2
k3 u3
k3 u2
k2 u1
k3 u3
k2 u2
k2 u1
k2 u2
k1 u1
2
3
Reductionto1DOF
Shape(Ritz)vector,
independentoftime
Unknownscalar
dependentontime
Theanalysisimpliesthattheresponseofthestructurecanbe
describedwithjustonemode.
Itisvalidforlowriseregularbuildings.
10
Reducedequation
Premultiplyingby
FinallyaODFequation,with astheonlyunknown,canbesolvednumerically
forahistoryofbaseaccelerations
Alternatively
Standardformofa1DOFequation
Forspectracreation
Relationofstandardformto
specificproblem
Homogeneousequation
Forthehomogeneousformoftheequation
0
Thesolutionisjustaharmonicfunction
cos
sin
Where and areconstantsthataredeterminedwiththeInitialconditions.

Substitutingthissolutioninthehomogeneousequation,leads
totheeigenvalueequation,fromwhich and aredetermined
Representationofstiffnesswithmass
,wecanapproximatethe
Inourcaseweassume ,sopremultiplyingby
frequencyas
/
11
Approximatedperiod
Doingthealgebra
,
Thefrequencyofvibrationandperiodmaybecalculatedas
Codesapproximation
TheIndiancodeapproximationoftheperiod
Fundamentalperiod(Cl.7.6.2),basedonoverallstructuredimensions,doesnot
Includeactualwallgeometrynormaterialproperties
0.09
where
overallbuildingheight
plandimension
12
Codesapproximatedperiod
TheMexicancodeusestheshownapproximatedformula,startingwith
,thereforebymultiplyinganddividingby
storey shearis
youget
Setting
/ is not hard to end with
, and
usingMexicanorIndian definitionshasverylittleeffect
Seismicforces
Oncetheperiodiscalculated,onemayestimatethepeakdisplacement
fromadisplacementspectrumor,moreoften,calculatepeakpseudoacceleration
fromthesitepeakpseudoaccelerationspectrum(seethatlater)
Theearthquakeforcescanbecalculatedintermsofpeakdisplacementsas,

orintermsofpseudoacceleration,rememberingthat
andpseudoaccelerationis
13
Baseshear
Tocalculatebaseshearweonlyneedtoaddallfloorseismicforces
sousingpeakpseudoacceleration,thebaseshearcanbewrittenas
(remembering
/ and
)
Incasewehadaperfectdescriptionoftheresponse wouldbethetotal
massofthesystem,i.e.,
/ ,inourapproximationwecantakeitastrueso
maybeusedtomeasurehowmuchoftheresponsecanberepresentedwith
CodeformulaforQ
Firstletusreinterpretthelateralforces
Q3
Multiplyinganddividingby
Q2
Therearemanypossibilitiesfor ,the
leadingto
Indiancodeassume
Q1
The Mexican code uses
leadingtoaverysimilarexpression
14
Indiancodelateralforces
Designbaseshear(IS18937.5.3)
where (IS18936.4)
2
isthezonefactor(IS1893table2), /2 istheDesignBasis
Earthquake(the2inthedenominatoristhemaximumEarthquake
reductionfactor),
istheimportancefactor(IS1893table6),
istheresponsereductionfactor( /
1.0),
istheaverageresponseacceleration(IS1893sec6.4.5),basedon
naturalperiodofthestructure,and
isthetotalweightofthestructureforseismicanalysis(IS18937.4)
Peakacceleration
1
15
2.5
1
0.1
0.4
4.0
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
T(s)
15
Example
Example
Usingasshapevectoralinearfunctionwithheight
Analyticfrequency
5.93%
16
UsingQdistributionwithheight
Wemaystartcalculatingthelateralforces , thenshearforceperfloor
andhavingtheshearforce,calculatethedisplacements.The obtained
distributionofdisplacementsmaybeusedasshapevector.Thisprocedure
issensibletothedistributionofmasandthefloorheights
Usingthenewshapevectortoestimatethefrequencyofvibrationwehavean
almostexactresult
Variationofperiod
Tohaveanideaofhowgoodisourhypothesisofshearstructure,i.e.,rigid
beams,letsseetheeffectoftherelativebeamtocolumnstiffnesstotheperiod.
Variationofperiodwithbeamrelativestiffness
CalculatedwithSAP2000
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
Thehypothesisofshearstructureproducelowerperiodsthanthetrueone,however
Theapproximationgavebetterresultsthanthiscurvesuggest
17
SeismicDesign,Detailing,andConstruction
ofReinforcedMasonryShearWalls

Acknowledgments
NazliAzimikorandBrookRobazza,Masters
Degreestudents,UBC,Canada
Dr.DonAndersonandDr.KenElwood,UBC,
Canada
BillMcEwen,P.Eng.,ExecutiveDirector,MIBC,
Canada
Dr.WaelElDakhakhniandDr.Robert
Drysdale,McMasterUniversity,Canada
Topics
9 Seismicdesignanddetailingprovisionsforductile
reinforcedmasonry(RM)shearwalls
9 Researchstudiesonseismicperformanceofductile
RMshearwalls
9 ConstructionofRMwalls
SeismicDesignofReinforcedMasonryWalls
Focusonreinforcedconcreteblockmasonry referredas
ReinforcedMasonry(RM) inthispresentation
Shearwallssubjectedtoinplaneandoutofplaneseismicloads
Seismicdesignconsiderations:capacitydesign,ductile
performance,groutinginplastichingezone,wallheightto
thicknessratiorestrictions,preventshearfailure
Note: the main source for this presentation is the book
Seismic Design Guide for Masonry Buildings by Don
Anderson and Svetlana Brzev available free at
www.ccmpa.ca
SeismicDesignPhilosophy
Firstcalculatemaximumelasticseismicforces
Thenreducetoaccountforductilityandoverstrength
Lateral Force
H, '
Maximum
Elastic Force
Elastic
Elastic Force
reduced by R
Actual
Design Force
0
Lateral
Deflection
SeismicBaseShearForce
VB
Z Sa

T

a
2 g
W
Ah Ta W
R

I
where
Ah(Ta) =Designhorizontalaccelerationspectrum
W
=Seismicweight
ForceModificationFactorR
PrescribedbyIS1893:2002(rev2005)
Masonry:
R=1.5unreinforcedmasonry
R=2.5reinforcedwithhorizontalRCbands
R=3.0reinforcedwithhorizontalRCbandsand
verticalbarsatcorners
RCshearwalls:
R=from3.0(ordinaryshearwall)to5.0(ductile
shearwall)
ClassesofDuctileRMShearWalls
Usuallydesigncodesprescribe2ormoreclasseswith
differentductilitylevels
Twoclasses:
1) Conventional(ordinary)construction(minimum
seismicdetailingrequirements,butalsoalimited
ductility)
2) Ductile masonrywalls(higherductility,butadditional
seismicdetailingrequirementsprescribed)
Mostcodeshavemorethanoneductilewallclass(e.g.
Canadian,U.S.,NewZealandCode)
KeySeismicDesignRequirements
RMShearWalls
1.
2.
3.
4.
Capacitydesignapproach
Plastichingezone
Ductilitycheck
Shearresistance(discountedcomparedto
nonseismicdesign)
5. Wallheight/thicknesslimits
CapacityDesignApproachandDuctilePerformance
10
CapacityDesignApproach:Example
CapacityDesignApproach:ShearFailuretobeAvoided!
Flexural
mechanism
Shear
mechanism
PlasticHingeZone Length
Plastichinge=regionofthemember
whereinelasticdeformationsand
damageoccur
Theabilityofplastichingetosustain
theseinelasticdeformationswill
determinewhetheramemberis
capableofperformingatacertain
ductilitylevel
Keyproperty:plastichingelengthlp
13
PlasticHingeLength
Norequirementsforconventional(ordinary)
walls
Forductilewalls:plastichingelengthlpgreaterof
lw
=
walllength
1/6th ofthewallheight
hw/6=
Note:plastichingezoneinductileRMwallsmust
befullygrouted(norequirementsforconventional
construction)
14
DuctilityCheck
Purpose: to ensure
that the structural
member is able to
attain the ductility
level prescribed by
design
Usually required to
find inelastic strain Hi
Alternatively, check
neutral axis depth/
wall length ratio (c/lw)
Hi
ShearResistance
Diagonaltension
Brittlefailuremechanism(forcecontrolled),and
shouldbeavoidedthroughappropriatedesignand
detailing
Someresearchersconsiderdiagonalshearfailurein
RMshearwallswithhorizontalreinforcementasa
ductilefailuremechanism
Slidingshear
Displacementcontrolledfailuremechanism
Essentiallyductile,howeverthatisnotrecognizedby
designcodes
Researchevidencelimited
DiagonalTension
Differentfailuremechanismdevelopsinflexural
andsquatshearwalls!
Flexural walls
Squat walls
hw/lw > 1.0
hw/lw d 1.0
17
DiagonalTension FlexuralWalls
18
DiagonalTensionShearResistance
Shearresistanceequaltothesumofmasonry
andsteelresistance:
Vr=Vm +Vs
Ductileshearwalls:50%reductioninVm value
(masonryresistancediscounted)
Conventional(ordinary)walls:noreduction
19
SquatDuctileRMShearWalls StrutConcept
forShearTransfer
20
10
SquatShearWalls:MustHaveTransfer
BeamattheTop!
SlidingShearResistance
Basedonthe
CoulombsLaw
Slidingatthebase
occurswhenthe
shearforce
exceedsfrictional
resistanceatthe
wall/foundation
interface
11
SlidingShearResistance Equation
Canadianmasonrydesignstandard(CSAS30404):
SlidingShearResistance DuctileRMWalls
Conventional
Construction
Ductile RM
Shear Walls
24
12
WallHeight/ThicknessRatio:Restrictions
(notapplicabletoConventionalConstruction)
Canadianmasonry
designstandard
restrictsh/t for
ductileRMwalls:
14<h/t<20
Instability(buckling)ofcompressionzonein
reinforcedmasonry shearwallsunderinplane
seismicloading
Lateral(OutofPlane)Buckling
P
T
M
C
13
Conventional
(ordinary)
Construction
Minimumseismic
reinforcement
requirements
Partiallygrouted
(onlyreinforced
coresgrouted)
Ductile RM
Shear Walls
Morestringent
reinforcement
detailing
requirements
(hooks,lapsplices)
Grouting
mandatoryinthe
plastichingezone!
14
The guide can be

downloaded free of
charge:
www.ccmpa.ca
guide to be posted
on the web site!
29
ResearchStudiesonSeismicBehaviourof
DuctileRMShearWalls
SeveralstudiesperformedinCanada,USA,
Australia,andNewZealand
Objective:toevaluateseismicdesign
requirementsforductilereinforcedmasonry
shearwallscontainedincurrentdesigncodes
Inmanycasescodesareconservativeasrelatedto
seismicdesignofreinforcedmasonrystructures
15
Partially
Grouted Walls
Minaie (2009)
DrexelUniversity,
Philadelphia,USA
31
Partially Grouted Walls
H/L=0.68 P'= 3.13 Uh=0.16% Uv=0.14%
Minae (2010)
Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA
16
Partially Grouted Walls

H/L=1.5 P'= 3.75
Uh=0.04% Uv=0.18%
Cracking pattern (0.41% drift) - ultimate
Maleki and Drysdale (2009),

McMaster University, Canada
Partially
Grouted Walls
Voon and Ingham (2007)

University of Auckland,
New Zealand
34
17
DuctileRMWalls(FullyGrouted):
ResearchStudyatMcMasterUniversity,Canada
Stretcher
1#10
@400mm
HalfSplitter
190
Splitter
1800
3600
The study involved testing of 6

full-size wall specimens
Height 3.6 m
Length 1.8 m
Thickness 20 cm
HZ.Rft
VL.Rft
1#25
@400mm
600
1800
Source: M. Shedid, W. El-Dakhakhni and R. Drysdale
2300
35
Wall 1: Load-Displacement Curves
Source: M. Shedid, W. El-Dakhakhni and R. Drysdale

36
18
Wall 1
Damage
Source: M. Shedid, W. ElDakhakhni and R. Drysdale
37
DuctileRMShearWalls(FullyGrouted):Research
StudyatUBC,Canada
Thickness, t
Height, h
Length, L
h/t ratio
h/L
Uv
Uh
fm
= 140 mm
= 3800 mm
= 2600 mm
= 27.1
= 1.5
= 0.33%
= 0.36%
= 53 MPa
15M
10M
15M
42
Source: Brook Robazza
19
WallSpecimens
1. W1 simulated bottom storey of a multi-storey structure with two
inclined vertical actuators to simulate overturning moment
2. W2 simulated a wall in a single-storey structure
20
SpecimenW1 LoadingProtocol
Displacement-controlled loading protocol based on yield strain in end
reinforcing bars with constant axial load of 660 kN (0.034fm)
Specimen W1 Results
X
21
SpecimenW2 LoadingProtocol
Displacementcontrolledloadingprotocolbasedonsamedisplacement
incrementasW1withzeroappliedaxialload
Specimen W2 - Results
XX
22
Walls with Boundary Elements
Boundary elements (similar to

reinforced concrete shear walls)
Source: M. Shedid, W. El-Dakhakhni and R. Drysdale, McMaster University, Canada
45
Walls with Boundary Elements: Results

-50
Top Displacement (mm)

-25
0
25
50
-60

-30
0
30
60
Lateral Resistance (kN)
100
100
0
-100
Wall 1
2.6%

-30
0
30
60
100
50
0
-50
-150
-2.25%
-100
-100
-200
-2.6% -1.3% 0.0% 1.3%
Top Drift (%)
-60
200
150
200
-0.75%
0.75%
Top Drift (%)
Wall 2
2.25%
-200
-2.25%
-0.75%
0.75%
Top Drift (%)
2.25%
Wall 3
Displacement ductility at the ultimate on the

order of 6.0
Source: M. Shedid, W. El-Dakhakhni and R. Drysdale, McMaster University, Canada
46
23
ResearchStudies KeyFindings
Thestudiesshowthatreinforcedmasonryshear
wallscanperformextremelywellunderseismic
loadingandcanachieveductilitycomparableto
reinforcedconcreteshearwalls
Behaviourofpartiallygroutedwallsisdifferent
fromfullygroutedwallsandtheresulting
mechanismofsheartransferisdifferent
Squatshearwallshavedifferentbehaviourfrom
flexuralwalls
47
FurtherReading DuctileRMShearWalls
(tobepostedonthewebsite)
48
24
WallConstructionIllustrated
Grid of Rebar & Grout
25
Construction Process
Reinforcing Walls
26
VerticalReinforcement
Horizontal
Reinforcement
Bond beam reinforcement

Joint (ladder) reinforcement
27
HorizontalReinforcement
Bond Beam Course (mesh forms bottom)
Typical Bond Beam

(pour height 2.4 m)
28
Flexible small module

Stirrups for larger beams
Reinforced Masonry
School Building (Canada)
29
Grouting
ProvisionsforOpenings(Pipes)
30
Movement Joints
Locations specified
by the designer:
~ 15 m for
reinforced masonry
Possible
Bond beam
detail
Questions?
No.62
31
EXAMPLE 5a: Seismic design of a flexural shear wall of limited ductility

Perform the seismic design of a shear wall X 1 , which is a part of the building discussed in
Example 2. The wall is four storeys high, with the total height of 14 m, and due to its height must
be designed either as a limited ductility or a moderate ductility shear wall per NBCC 2005
Table 4.1.8.9 (same as Table 1-13 in Chapter 1 of this document).
The section at the base of the wall is subjected to the total dead load of 1800 kN, the in-plane
seismic shear force of 1450 kN, and the overturning moment of 14500 kNm. Select the wall
dimensions (length and thickness) and the reinforcement such that the CSA S304.1 Cl.10.16.4
seismic design requirements for limited ductility shear walls are satisfied. Due to architectural
constraints, the wall length should not exceed 10 m, and a rectangular (unflanged) wall section
should be used.
Use hollow concrete blocks of 20 MPa unit strength and Type S mortar. Consider the wall as
solid grouted. Grade 400 steel reinforcement (yield strength f y = 400 MPa) is used for this
design.
Note: the wall dead load was calculated based on the tributary area (3.4 m by 13.4 m) at each
floor level (see a typical floor plan shown in Example 2), plus the wall self-weight.
SOLUTION:
1. Material properties
Steel (both reinforcing bars and joint reinforcement):
I s = 0.85 f y = 400 MPa
Masonry:
I m = 0.6
S304.1 Table 4, 20 MPa concrete blocks and Type S mortar:
4/1/2009
4-57
f mc = 10.0 MPa (assume solid grouted masonry)

2. Load analysis
The section at the base of the wall needs to be designed for the following load effects:
x Pf = 1800 kN axial load
V f = 1450 kN seismic shear force
M f = 14500 kNm overturning moment
According to S304.1 Cl.4.6.4, this is a flexural shear wall because hw = 14000 mm height and
l w = 10000 mm length, and
hw 14000
t
t 1 .4 ! 1 .0
l w 10000
and so the CSA S304.1 seismic design requirements for limited ductility (flexural) shear walls
should be followed.
3. Determine the required wall thickness based on the S304.1 height-to-thickness
requirements (Cl.10.16.4.1.2, see Section 2.5.4.4)
CSA S304.1-04 prescribes the following height-to-thickness ( h t ) limit for the compression zone
in limited ductility shear walls:
h (t 10) 18
For this example,
h = 5000 mm (the largest unsupported wall height)
So,
t t h 18 10 268 mm
Therefore, in this case the only possible wall thickness is
t 290 mm
Alternatively, the designer may wish to consider a flanged wall section with smaller thickness.
This is possible, except that (s)he would need to prove that the out-of-plane wall stability is not a
concern (see Example 5b).
4. Determine the wall length based on the shear design requirements.
Designers may be requested to determine the wall dimensions (length and thickness) based on
the design loads. In this case, the thickness is governed by the height-to-thickness ratio
requirements, and the length can be determined from the maximum shear resistance for the
wall section. The shear resistance for flexural walls cannot exceed the following limit (S304.1
Cl.10.10.1.1):
Vr d max Vr
Jg
0.4I m
f mc bw d v J g
1.0 solid grouted wall (required for plastic hinge zone)
bw 290 mm overall wall thickness

d v | 0.8l w effective wall depth
Set
Vr
Vf
1450 kN
and so
4/1/2009
4-58
lw !
1450 * 10 3
Vf
0.4I m
f mc bw (0.8)J g
0.4 * 0.6 * 10 * 290 * 0.8 * 1.0
8235 mm
Therefore, based on the shear design requirements the designer could select the wall length of
8.4 m. However, a preliminary capacity design check indicated that a minimum wall length of
nearly 10 m was required, thus try
l w 10000 mm
which gives
max Vr 1760 kN
5. Minimum CSA S304.1 seismic reinforcement requirements (see Table 2-2)
Since I E Fa S a 0.2 = 0.95 > 0.35, it is required to provide minimum seismic reinforcement
(S304.1 Cl.10.15.2.2). See Example 4a for a detailed discussion on the S304.1 minimum
seismic reinforcement requirements.
6. Design for the combined axial load and flexure (see Section C.1.1.2).
Design for the combined effects of axial load and flexure will be performed by assuming
uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement over the wall length. After a few trial estimates, the
total area of vertical reinforcement was determined as follows
Avt = 6000 mm2
20-20M reinforcing bars can be used for vertical reinforcement in this design, and the average
spacing is equal to
sd
10000 200
19
516 mm
Since the amount of vertical reinforcement is significant, it is required to check the maximum
reinforcement area per S304.1 Cl.10.15.3 (see Table 2-2).
Since s 516mm < 4t 4 * 290 1160mm
As max 0.02 Ag 0.02(290 * 10 3 ) 5800 mm2/m
This corresponds to the total reinforcement area of approximately 58000 mm2 for a 10 m long
wall; this is significantly larger than the estimated area of vertical reinforcement.
The wall is subjected to axial load Pf = 1800 kN. The moment resistance for the wall section
can be determined from the following equations (see Section C.1.1.2):
D 1 0.85 E 1 0.8 Z 0.12 D 0.1 c | 2400 mm
Mr
Pf
0.5I s f y Avt l w 1
I f A
s y vt
Mr
14600 kNm > M f
1 c
l
w
0.5 * 0.85 *
14500 kNm
400
10000
1800 * 10 3
2400
1
1
* 6000 *
1000
1000 0.85 * 400 * 6000 10000
OK
7. Perform the CSA S304.1 ductility check (see Section 2.5.4.3).

To satisfy the CSA S304.1 ductility requirements for limited ductility shear walls (Cl.10.16.4.1.4),
neutral axis depth ratio ( c l w ) should be less than the following limit:
c l w 0.2 when hw l w 6
In this case, the neutral axis depth
c = 2400 mm
and so
4/1/2009
4-59
c lw
2400 10000
0.24 ! 0.2
Therefore, the CSA S304.1 ductility requirement is not satisfied. However, Cl.10.16.4.1.4 also
states that the maximum compressive strain in masonry in the plastic hinge zone shall be
shown to not exceed 0.0025 at the desired ductility level.
At this point, the designer can use one of the following two alternative approaches to check
whether the ductility is adequate per CSA S304.1 Cl.10.16.4.1.4:
1) Find the required wall length such that the c l w limit prescribed in the CSA S304.1
ductility criteria is satisfied.
The wall length can be estimated from Table D-2, which provides c l w ratios for different input
parameters ( D and Z ). By inspection, it can be concluded that c l w 0.2 when D d 0.1 . Let
us try to estimate the wall length based on this criterion.
Since
1667 * Pf
set
f 'm l wt
0.09 0.1
and so
lw
1667 * Pf
1667 *1800
10.0 * 0.09 * 290
f ' m *D * t
11496 mm
Therefore, we can select an increased wall length l w
11600 mm.
2) Calculate the masonry strain in the extreme compression fibre based on the given
design loads, and prove that its value is less than 0.0025.
This check will be performed based on the procedure explained in Section B.2 (see Figure B-5).
The maximum displacement in the wall X 1 at the roof level was determined in Example 2 (step
8), that is,
' max
46mm
Note that the above value includes only translational displacement component. Since the wall
X 1 is located close to the centre of resistance, the torsional displacement component is not
significant. In the case of wall X 1 , torsional displacement has a different direction from the
translational displacement and (if included) the total displacement would be less than the
translational one.
The maximum displacement ' max is equal to the sum of elastic displacement at the onset of
steel yielding ' y and the plastic (post-yield) displacement ' p , that is,
' max
'y 'p
The yield curvature (corresponding to the onset of yielding in steel reinforcement) can be
estimated as follows
My
0.0035
lw
estimated as
' ye
0.0035
10000
3.5 * 10 7 The elastic displacement at the effective height can be
M y he 2
3.5 *10 10000
4/1/2009
7
11.7 mm
4-60
The elastic displacement at the top of the wall is equal to (see the discussion in Example 2, step
8)
'y
1.5 * ' ye
1.5 *11.7 17.5mm
So, the plastic displacement can be determined as
'p
' max ' y
46 17.5
28.5mm
The plastic rotation T p can be found from the plastic displacement at the top and assuming that
the plastic hinge has developed at the base is equal to (see the figure below)
'p
Tp
hw
28.5
5000
14000
2
lp
2
2.48 * 10 3 rad
where the plastic hinge length to be used for ductility calculations has been estimated as
lp
0.5l w
0.5 *10000
5000mm
The maximum curvature can be determined from the following relationship between the rotation
and the curvature:
Tp
and so
Mu M y
M y * l p
Tp
lp
2.48 * 10 3
5000
4.96 *10 7
The ultimate curvature can then be determined as
Mu
4.96 *10 7 3.5 *10 7
8.46 *10 7
The maximum compressive strain in masonry can be determined from the following equation
Mu
Hm
c
where
Hm
2400 mm neutral axis depth (see step 6) and so

M u * c (8.46 *10 7 )(2400) | 0.002
4/1/2009
4-61
It should be noted that this procedure uses an assumption that the neutral axis depth c has the
same value at the onset of yielding (corresponding to strain H y ) and at the ultimate
(corresponding to strain H m ); this is not true, however it does not significantly influence the
accuracy of numerical results.
Since H m 0.002 0.0025 it can
be concluded that the wall
satisfies the CSA S304.1 ductility
requirements and that it is not
necessary to increase its length.
Therefore, the wall length
l w 10000 mm will be used in
the next steps. It should be noted
that a larger wall length obtained
from the first approach
( l w 11600 mm) would have
resulted in a reduced amount of
vertical and horizontal
reinforcement for the same flexural and shear design requirements, and would be a viable
design solution had the wall length not been limited to 10 m due to architectural constraints.
8. The diagonal tension shear resistance and capacity design check (see Section 2.3.2
and CSA S304.1 Cl.10.10.1)
Masonry shear resistance ( Vm ):
bw 290 mm overall wall thickness

d v | 0.8l w 8000 mm effective wall depth
J g 1.0 solid grouted wall
Pd
0.9 Pf = 1620 kN
vm
0.16(2
Mf
V f dv
) f mc = 0.51 MPa
Since
Mf
14500
= 1.25 > 1.0
1450 * 8.0
V f dv
use
Vm
Mf
V f dv
1.0
Im (vm bw d v 0.25 Pd )J g = 0.6(0.51*290*8000+0.25*1620*103)*1.0 = 953 kN
S304.1 Cl.10.16.3.3 requires that ductile reinforced masonry shear walls be designed according
to the capacity design approach (see Section 2.5.2 for more details). According to that
approach, the shear capacity should exceed the shear corresponding to the nominal moment
resistance (see Figure 2-22), as follows
Mn
Mr
Is
14600
0.85
17176 kNm
where
Mr
14600 kNm
4/1/2009
the factored moment resistance (see Step 6).
4-62
Shear force acts at the effective height he , that is, distance from the base of the wall to the
resultant of all seismic forces acting at floor levels. he can be determined as follows
he
Mf
Vf
10.0 m
The shear force Vnb that would cause the overturning moment equal to M n can be found as
follows
Mn
he
Vnb
17176
10.0
1718 kN
This is less than the maximum shear allowed on the section (S304.1 Cl.10.10.1.1)
max Vr 0.4I m f mc bw d v J g 1760 kN OK
Thus the required steel shear resistance is
Vs Vr Vm 1718 953 765 kN
The required amount of reinforcement can be found from the following equation
Av
s
765 * 10 3
0.6 * 0.85 * 400 * 8000
Vs
0.6I s f y d v
0.47
Try 2-15M bond beam reinforcing bars at 800 mm spacing ( Av
Av
s
400
800
0.5 > 0.47
400 mm2 and s
800 mm):
OK
Steel shear resistance Vs :
Vs
0.6I s Av f y
dv
s
0.6 * 0.85 *
400
8000
= 816 kN
* 400 *
1000
800
Total diagonal shear resistance:
Vr
Vm V s
953 816 1769 kN
Since
Vr
1769 kN > V f
1450 kN
OK
In conclusion, both the shear design requirements and the capacity design requirements have
been satisfied.
9. Sliding shear resistance (see Section 2.3.3)
The factored in-plane sliding shear resistance Vr is determined as follows:
P = 1.0 for a masonry-to-masonry or masonry-to-roughened concrete sliding plane
As = 6000 mm2 total area of vertical wall reinforcement

Ty I s As f y = 0.85*6000*400 = 2040 kN
Pd
0.9 Pf = 1620 kN
P2
Pd Ty = 1620+2040 = 3660 kN
Vr
Vr
I m PP2 = 0.6*1.0*3660 = 2196 kN

2196 kN > V f
1450 kN
2196 kN > Vnb
1718 kN
OK
Also,
Vr
4/1/2009
(capacity design check)
4-63
10. CSA S304.1 seismic detailing requirements for limited ductility walls plastic hinge
region
According to Cl.10.16.4.1.1, the required height of the plastic hinge region for limited ductility
shear walls (for which special detailing is required) must be greater than (see Table 2-4)
l p l w / 2 10.0 2 5.0 m
or
lp
hw / 6 14.0 / 6
2.3 m
(note that hw denotes the total wall height)

Thus,
l p 5.0 m governs
Reinforcement detailing requirements for the plastic hinge region of limited ductility shear walls
are:
1. The wall in the plastic hinge region must be solid grouted (Cl.10.16.4.1.3, see Table 24).
2. Horizontal reinforcement requirements (see Figure 2-31)
a) Reinforcement spacing should not exceed the following limits (Cl.10.16.4.3.3), see Table 2-2:
s d 1200 mm or
s d l w 2 10000 2
5000 m
Since the lesser value governs, the maximum permitted spacing is

s d 1200 mm
According to the design (see step 8), the horizontal reinforcement consists of 2-15M bars at
800 mm spacing - OK
b) Detailing requirements (Cl.10.16.4.3.3), see Table 2-3:
Horizontal reinforcement shall not be lapped within
600 mm or
c = 2400 mm (the neutral axis depth)
whichever is greater, from the end of the wall. In this case, the reinforcement should not be
lapped within the distance c = 2400 mm from the end of the wall. The horizontal reinforcement
can be lapped at the wall half-length.
3. Vertical reinforcement requirements (see Table 2-3).
There are no special detailing requirements for vertical reinforcement in limited ductility shear
walls.
4/1/2009
4-64
11. Design summary

Reinforcement arrangement for the wall under consideration is summarized on the figure below.
Note that the shear wall of limited ductility must be solid grouted in plastic hinge region, but it
may be partially grouted outside the plastic hinge region (this depends on the design forces).
12. Discussion
It is important to consider all possible behaviour modes and identify the one that governs in this
design. The following three shear resistance values need to be considered:
a) Vnb 1718 kN shear force corresponding to flexural failure
b) Vr
c) Vr
1769 kN diagonal tension shear resistance

2196 kN sliding shear resistance
Since the shear force corresponding to the flexural resistance is smallest of the three values, it
can be concluded that the flexural failure mechanism is critical in this case, which is desirable
for the seismic design.
Had the design specified a shear wall of conventional construction, the same amount of vertical
and horizontal reinforcement would have been required, but none of the special detailing
discussed in step 10 would have been required. Also, the CSA S304.1 ductility check discussed
in step 7 is not required for shear walls of conventional construction.
4/1/2009
4-65
Analysis & Design of Reinforced

Concrete Block (RCB) Buildings
Durgesh C Rai
Professor
IIT Kanpur

INTRODUCTION
Reinforced masonry walls are often subjected to lateral loads from
wind and seismic actions
Should be appropriately designed to resist these types of loading
Main load-bearing elements are concrete blocks masonry reinforced
with horizontal bond beams in addition to steel reinforcement bars
placed in the hollow cores of the concrete blocks
Example Problem
Seismic analysis and design of a five-storied residential building of located
in seismic zone IV of IS 1893 (2002).
Load bearing reinforced masonry was designed for both gravity and seismic
load, such that even under severe ground shaking no major damage will be
experienced by the building.
2
Example Problem
2BHK multistoried reinforced concrete block (RCB) masonry
building consist eight blocks covering a total ground area of 697.3 m2
8-blocks have constant storey height of 2.9 m, making it 14.5 m tall
All blocks of the building are symmetrical to each other.
Plan view of 8-block 2BHK masonry building
Example Problem
Front view of 8-block 2BHK masonry building
Example Problem
Plan view of a block 2BHK masonry building
MODELING OF THE RCB Building

Multistoried masonry building was modeled and analyzed in ETABS
for both the axial and flexural stresses and compared them with the
demands.
GEOMETRIC MODELING
A three dimensional analytical model was prepared as per geometric details
specified for 2BHK multistoried masonry building using the analysis and
design software ETABS.
Details of building layout and geometry
No. of Blocks
Plan Area (m2)
No. of Piers
No. of Spandrels
73.6
105
100
697.3
820
800
MODELINGOFTHERCBBuilding
3D model of 2BHK building in ETABS

7
MODELING OF THE RCB Building
Wall (shell
element)
8
Slab (shell
element)
Beam (frame
element)
Plan view of 3D model
ETABS utilize physical object based analysis and design modeling
of wall systems
Single walls are modeled as cantilevers and walls with openings are
modeled as pier/spandrel systems
Allows user to create piers and spandrels that will produce integrated
moments and shears across sections of walls for design purposes
Integration is done by summing the nodal forces obtained from the
product of the stiffness matrix and the displacements of the elements
and not by integrating the stresses of the finite elements
ETABS can design the wall by calculating the reinforcing required to

resist all the combinations of loads
Very practical for Structural Engineers to use finite element models
routinely in their practice
Key modeling steps in ETABS
1. Create a system of grid lines, reference lines and reference planes
2. Define Wall section
10
3. Draw wall sections
11
4. Add openings (if required)
5. Assign Piers labels to selected wall section
12
4. Assign Piers labels
Rigid
element
Spandrel
Pier
Pier label for one-block
5. Similarly assign the spandrel beams and run the analysis

13
MATERIAL DEFINITION
Material
Modulus of
Characteristic
Weight per Unit
Volume (kN/m3) Elasticity, E (MPa) Strength (MPa)
Concrete
25
22360
20
Masonry
20
2750
5.5
LOAD DESCRIPTION
Live Load
Floors = 2 kN/m2
Roof = 1.5 kN/m2
Staircase and lobby = 3 kN/m2
Superimposed dead load at floors = 1 kN/m2 and at roof = 3 kN/m2
Line load of 5.8 kN/m was applied for partition walls (100 mm thick)
14
LOADCombinations
Three probable load cases have been considered to cause failure
Load Combinations
S. No.
Service Case
Ultimate Case
DL+LL
1.5(DL+LL)
0.75(DL+LL+EQ)
1.2 (DL+LL+EQ)
0.75(0.9DL-EQ)
(0.9DL-1.2EQ)
ANALYSIS CASES
Two types of analysis, i.e., service and ultimate analysis carried out.
2BHK multistoried masonry building was analyzed for service case
assuming the piers are unreinforced and un-cracked.
Ultimate strength design assume that the piers are reinforced.
15
MODAL ANALYSIS
Determine the predominant modes of vibration.
1st Mode, T1 = 0.30 s
16
2nd Mode T2 = 0.28 s
3rd Mode T3 = 0.10 s
MODAL ANALYSIS
Natural period given by the empirical expression as per IS: 1893
Ta
0.09h
d
h = Height of building, in m;
d = Base dimension of the building at the plinth level, in m, along the
considered direction of the lateral force.
Direction
Ta (s)
IS:1893
Ta (s)
ETABS Model
Shorter
Longer
0.31
0.21
0.30
0.28
Building lies in the short period range of IS 1893 response spectra

according to empirical relation of the code as well as the ETABS
analysis.
17
SHEARFORCE&BENDINGMOMENT
Piers
Spandrels
Shear force on piers and spandrels for load case 0.75(DL+LL+EQX)
Bending moment on piers and spandrels for load case 0.75(DL+LL+EQX)

18
LOADSONPEIRS
Service load combinations: Piers in X direction
Pier
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
P1
(kN)
DL+LL
V1
M1
(kN) (kN-m)
615.7
95.8
235.4
144.6
75.0
198.9
101.2
211.6
128.2
102.0
142.0
76.5
97.7
27.4
6.9
14.1
6.9
3.8
6.3
2.1
4.3
5.3
3.5
5.0
3.5
2.9
15.8
3.1
6.3
2.8
4.3
6.1
1.6
5.4
3.7
3.9
7.1
2.1
3.6
0.75(DL+LL+EQX)
P2
V2
M2
(kN) (kN) (kN-m)
0.75(0.9DL-EQX)
P3
V3
M3
(kN) (kN) (kN-m)
508.3
88.4
199.8
108.5
75.0
170.0
88.9
160.2
121.8
87.0
122.0
67.0
84.2
392.1
69.0
155.9
83.3
61.6
133.7
70.8
124.5
101.0
72.1
99.5
54.7
68.2
108.6
15.7
53.5
25.3
5.7
18.7
12.0
31.3
13.6
12.6
15.4
12.8
14.3
261.9
5.1
25.3
10.4
6.1
23.9
8.5
32.4
7.9
7.8
14.9
5.4
7.9
107.2
15.4
43.7
20.8
4.6
17.3
11.8
31.3
13.1
12.4
14.9
12.0
13.8
260.3
4.9
21.5
8.9
4.8
23.4
8.3
32.6
7.3
7.2
13.9
5.1
7.5
19
LOADSONPEIRS
Ultimate load combinations: Piers in X direction
Pier
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
P1
(kN)
923.5
143.7
353.1
216.8
112.5
298.4
151.9
317.4
192.3
153.0
212.9
114.8
146.5
DL+LL
0.75(DL+LL+EQX)
V1
M1
P2
V2
M2
(kN) (kN-m) (kN) (kN) (kN-m)
41.0
23.7
813.2 173.8
419.0
10.3
4.7
141.4
25.1
8.1
21.2
9.4
319.7
85.5
40.5
10.4
4.2
173.6
40.5
16.7
5.7
6.5
120.0
9.2
9.7
9.5
9.1
272.0
29.9
38.2
3.1
2.5
142.2
19.2
13.6
6.5
8.1
256.3
50.1
51.9
7.9
5.6
194.9
21.8
12.7
5.2
5.9
139.2
20.2
12.5
7.5
10.6
195.1
24.6
23.9
5.2
3.1
107.2
20.5
8.7
4.4
5.3
134.7
22.9
12.7
0.75(0.9DL-EQX)
M3
P3
V3
(kN) (kN) (kN-m)
538.5 170.6
414.3
96.4
24.7
7.5
214.5
71.0
34.9
113.7
32.5
13.9
87.2
6.9
7.2
183.6
27.6
37.3
98.2
18.8
13.3
166.9
49.7
52.1
142.2
20.5
11.1
99.8
19.6
10.9
137.4
23.5
21.2
75.9
18.8
7.8
94.4
22.0
11.4
20
10
DESIGN CHECK FOR PIERS

Three load combinations have used to check the pier against the
axial and flexural stress (IITK-GSDMA Guidelines)
All walls are checked for limiting value of slenderness ratio
Axial and flexural stresses (Load case 1)
Allowable compressive stresses
Fa k s k a k p k b c
Axial force on wall
f 1a
P1
A
Demand capacity ratio
f 1a
Fa
DR A
21

Bending compression under Load case 2
Allowable compressive stresses
Fb 1 .2 5 Fa
Axial force on wall
f 2a
P2
A
f 2b
M 2
Sg
Bending component
DR B
Under combined action
f 2b
Fb
D RC
f 1a
f 1b
Fa
Fb
22
11

Axial tension under Load case 3
Allowable tensile stresses
FT 0.07 MPa
Axial force on wall
f 3b
M3
Sg
- Axial tension on wall section, f 3
Bending component
f 3a
P3
A
f 3 f 3b f 3a
f3
Ft
D RT
23

Shear stress (Envelope value from all load cases)
Allowable shear stresses
0.5 M P a
Fv m in 0.1 0.2( f d ) M P a
0.125 f m M P a
Shear force on wall
fv
m a x (V 1, V 2 a n d V 3 )
A
D Rs
fv
Fv
24
12
SUMMARY OF DEMAND CAPACITY RATIO

Demand capacity ratio calculated considering no reinforcement
(DRA , DRB, DRC, DRT and DRS)
Pier
DRA
DRB
DRC
DRT
DRS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
0.31
0.66
0.67
0.70
0.59
0.65
0.56
0.47
0.47
0.49
0.52
0.53
0.47
0.15
0.28
0.29
0.30
0.38
0.31
0.28
0.22
0.14
0.23
0.26
0.30
0.23
0.41
0.66
0.81
0.76
0.86
0.86
0.74
0.57
0.48
0.53
0.58
0.75
0.53
1.79
2.31
2.00
1.78
3.02
2.16
2.41
0.41
0.27
1.47
1.72
1.36
1.01
1.22
1.25
1.58
1.13
0.39
0.72
0.67
0.83
0.69
0.76
0.71
0.83
0.85
25
MINIMUM VERTICAL REINFORCEMENT

Masonry wall shall be uniformly reinforced in both horizontal and
vertical direction
Sum of reinforcement area in both directions shall be at least 0.2% of the
gross cross-sectional area of the wall
Minimum reinforcement area in each direction shall be not less than
0.07% of the gross cross-sectional area of the wall.
Vertical reinforcement of at least 100 mm2 in cross sectional area shall
be provided at a maximum spacing of 3 m on center at critical
sections:
Corners
Within 400 mm of each side of openings,
Within 200 mm of the end side of the wall
26
13
MINIMUMVERTICALREINFORCEMENT
Reinforcement Details
No.
Min Reinf. Reqd.
Av
b
d
Pier
Reqd. Prod. Prod.
pst
p (%)
of
As
(bd) (mm)
No. (mm) (mm) Corners Middle st
N
N
rebar
1
130 4200
2
1
0.14 764.4 78
9.80
11
11
0.16
2
130 600
2
0.14 109.2 78
1.40
2
2
0.20
3
130 1200
2
0.14 218.4 78
2.80
3
3
0.15
4
130 800
2
0.14 145.6 78
1.87
2
2
0.15
5
130 600
2
0.14 109.2 78
1.40
2
2
0.20
6
130 1200
2
0.14 218.4 78
2.80
3
3
0.15
7
130 800
2
0.14 145.6 78
1.87
2
2
0.15
8
130 1600
2
0.14 291.2 78
3.73
4
5
0.19
9
130 1000
2
0.14 182.0
78
2.33
3
3
0.18
10
130 800
2
0.14 145.6 78
1.87
2
2
0.15
11
130 1000
2
0.14 182.0
78
2.33
3
3
0.18
12
130 600
2
0.14 109.2 78
1.40
2
2
0.20
13
130 800
2
0.14 145.6 78
1.87
2
2
0.15
27
MINIMUMVERTICALREINFORCEMENT
Reinforcement layout
28
14
Design Check under combined loading

P-M Interaction curves are generated for reinforced concrete block
masonry piers using SAP 2000 - Section Designer
10 mm dia.
rebar
Hollow
concrete block
Pier 8
29
P-M INTERACTION CURVE

Design check for three ultimate load cases
500
400
P (kN)
300
200
100
0
1.5(DL+LL)
1.2 (DL+LL+EQ)
(0.9*DL-1.2*EQ)
-100
-200
Pier 8
40
80
120
160
M (kNm)
Similar interaction curves were developed for all piers

Usually ultimate demand on concrete block masonry piers with 10 mm
dia. bars lie within its capacity interaction curve except for few piers
30
15
PMINTERACTIONCURVE
For Pier no. 3, the 10 mm dia. rebars were not adequate and larger
diameter of rebars were needed to meet the demand
Diameter and number of bars were increased to satisfy the demand
400
300
P (kN)
200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
3 bars,
10 mm dia.
3 Rebars, 10 mm dia
5 Rebars, 12 mm dia
20
5 bars,
12 mm dia.
40
60
M (kNm)
80
100
31
Finallayoutofrebars
32
16
Thank you
17

Acknowledgments
DurgeshRai,IITKanpur,India
C.V.R.Murty,IITJodhpur,India
SudhirJain,IITGandhinagar,India
OsmarPenner,UBC,Canada
JoseCenteno,UBC,Canada
No. 2
Topics
1. Stonemasonry
2. Claybrickmasonry
3. Reinforcedmasonry
4. SeismicIntegrity
No. 3
EARTHQUAKES HAPPEN
and they can be very destructive
Unreinforced masonry buildings tend to

be very vulnerable to earthquake effects
4
StoneMasonry
Traditional form of construction that has
been practiced for centuries in regions
where stone is locally available.
Stone buildings range from cultural and
historical landmarks to simple dwellings
built by their owners in developing
countries where stone is an affordable
and cost-effective building material for
housing construction.
No. 5
StoneMasonry EarthquakePerformance
Stonemasonrybuildings areextremely
vulnerabletoearthquakeshaking,mostlydue
totheirheavyweightand themannerin
whichthewallshavebeenbuilt.
Bothnew andexistingstonemasonry
buildingsareatriskinearthquakeproneareas
oftheworld.
StoneMasonryDamage:NotableEarthquakes
Significantearthquakefatalitiesinregions
wherestonemasonryhasbeenused
2005Kashmirearthquake(M7.6),over74,000
peoplediedinPakistan
2001Bhujearthquake(M7.7)inIndia,most
ofthe13,800deaths
1993Maharashtraearthquake(M6.4) more
than8,000deaths
Otherearthquakes:Italy,Turkey,Iran
TheSeptember30,1993Maharashtra
Earthquake(M6.4)
Moderateearthquake:6.4magnitude
(Richterscale)
HumanLoss:over8,000deathsand16,000
injuries
TotalPropertyLoss:$330million
DamagetotheBuilt Environment
Affectedareaapprox.40,000sq.km.
13(outof31)districtsintheStateaffected
Over230,000housingunitsinover2,500villages
damaged/collapsed
APPROXIMATELY 1MILLIONPEOPLE AFFECTED
10
1993 Killari (Latur District), Maharashtra

Earthquake
11
Traditional Building Construction

Over 85% housing is stone masonry
construction
Thick stone masonry walls support flat
timber roofs with earthen overlays
Climatic conditions: low rainfall and
extremely hot summer months
(temperatures over 40C)
12
13
Building Collapse in the 1993 Earthquake
14
Complete Devastation in the 1993 Earthquake
15
Random Rubble Stone Masonry Walls
wall thickness ranges from 50 cm to 2 m

16
Typical Failure Mechanism:

Wall Delamination (Buldging)
Wall Delamination in the 1993 Eq.
18
FurtherReading:StoneMasonry
Strategies for
improving seismic
performance of stone
masonry discussed in
the publication
Printed copies
available through
NICEE in India!
Free download:
www.world-housing.net/tutorials/stone-tutorials
19
UnreinforcedBrickMasonry
No. 20
Unreinforcedbrickmasonryconstructionis
widelyusedaroundtheworld
OftenreferredasURMconstruction
Reinforcedmasonryconstructionpractice
startedinNorthAmericaafterthe1933Santa
Barbara(California)earthquake
Therearemanyexistingunreinforcedbrick
masonrybuildingsinNorthAmericaand
Europe someofthesebuildingshavebeen
retrofitted
10
URMDamageinPastEarthquakes
Oftensufferdamage(cracking),andcollapse
insomecases
Themostcommontypeofdamageisnon
structural,e.g.parapetcollapse
FailuremechanismsforURMwallswere
discussedyesterday
PerformanceofURMBuildingsintheU.S.
Earthquakes
Pioneer Square,
Seattle, USA
2001 Nisqually
(Washington)
earthquake, M 6.8
11
Source: Seattle PI, March 3, 2001; p. B3
February27,2010Maule,ChileEarthquake(M8.8)
Magnitude 8.8 earthquake !
521 deaths
5 collapsed buildings
ONLY 100 severely damaged buildings
Approximately 1% of the total building
stock in the earthquake-affected area either
damaged or collapsed
Note: Masonry is prevalent building
construction technology in Chile!
12
Earthquake
Rupture
Zone
The rupture
zone was 500
km long by 100
km wide
Source: EERI Newsletter,
June 2010
Response spectra (black line

denotes code-level spectrum)
13
MasonryConstructioninChile
Widelyusedforlow andmediumrise
buildings(mostlyresidential)
Olderbuildingsunreinforcedbrickoradobe
masonry
Newconstructionmostlyconfinedmasonry
Hollowclayblocksmostprevalentinmodern
construction
Claybricksthesecondmostpopularmasonry
unit
TypicalURMBuildings
28
14
TypicalURMBuildings(contd)
29
InPlaneShearCracking
30
15
InPlaneShearCracking(contd)
31
InPlaneandOutofPlaneSeismicLoads
Inplanewalls
=SHEARWALLS
Outofplane
walls
Directionof
groundmotion
considered
16
OutofPlaneDamage/Failure
33
OutofPlaneDamage:ChurchinPutu
34
17
OutofPlaneDamage:ChurchinPutu
35
InPlaneDamage:ChurchinPutu
36
18
URMDamageinthe2001BhujEarthquake
ShearCracksattheGroundFloorLevel,2001BhujEq.
19
ReinforcedMasonry
Reinforcedmasonryconstructionhasbeenin
usesince1930sinNorthAmerica(California)
Thereisalimitedevidencerelatedtoseismic
performanceofreinforcedmasonrybuildings,
especiallyhollowconcreteblockconstruction
Notableearthquakes:1994Northridge,
California,2010Chileeq.,and2011New
Zealandearthquake
39
PerformanceofReinforcedConcreteMasonry
BlockConstructionin2010ChileEq.
Casestudy:BuildingcomplexinRancaguaconsisting
offourandfivestoreyreinforcedmasonrybuildings
builtin1993
140mmhollowconcreteblocks(compressive
strengthof8to10MPa)
Horizontalreinforcement twobarsplacedinthe
bedjoints(8to10mmdiameter,600mmspacing)
Verticalbarsplacedinthegroutedcores(diameter
variesfrom8to12mm,800mmtypicalspacing)
Buildingsseverelydamagedinthe2010earthquake
andhadtobevacated
20
ATypicalReinforcedMasonryBuilding
41
TypicalHorizontal
ReinforcingScheme
Horizontal
reinforcement at
the sill level
21
Horizontal
reinforcement
at the sill
level
Vertical
Reinforcement
44
22
DamageinMasonryWallsattheGroundFloorLevel
45
46
23
2011Christchurch,NewZealandearthquake
Severalolderreinforcedmasonrybuildings
wereexposedtotheearthquake
Buildingswere5to10storeyshigh,mostly
residentialapartmentbuildings
Hollowconcreteblockmasonryunits
Ductileseismicdetailing
Someofthebuildingssufferedsevere
damage,butnocollapsewasreported
47
BishopParks(7storeybuilding)
Sistema Principal de
Mamposteria Reforzada
Diseo en 1985
24
Back View of Building

View East - West
(Perpendicular to Park
Terrace)
Elevator Shaft
Stairs
Machine Room
25
Elevator Shear
Wall Core
Horizontal crack at 2nd floor level,

sliding residual deformation
Vertical Splitting Cracks

Rebar bonding failure, possible
inadequate horizontal rebar anchoring
Lap Splice Failure

Vertical splitting cracks below lap splices
Vertical Rebar 12mm diameter, fy = 300 MPa
Lap Splice Length 800 mm starting above
floor level
800 mm / 12 mm = 66.67 db
Level
Level
From Structural Drawings
26
Integrity(BoxAction)CriticalforSeismic
PerformanceofURMBuildings
Source: Bothara and Brzev (2011)

No. 53
RCCBands:CriticalforEnsuringIntegrity!
Source: Bothara and Brzev

(2011)
No. 54
27
IntegrityofURMBuildings
Ensurewall
todiaphragm
connections!
Diaphragms
Outofplane
walls
Inplane
walls
Directionof
ground
motion
considered
LackofIntegrityCausesOutofPlaneWallFailures
LomaPrieta,SanFrancisco,
California(1989)
lifesafety
Photocredit:NOAANationalGeophysicalDataCenter
28
OutofPlaneWallFailures
Northridge,California(1994)
Photocredit:NOAANationalGeophysicalDataCenter
OutofPlaneWallFailures
Christchurch,NewZealand(2010/2011)
Photocredit:D.Dizhur
29
TheMay21,2003Boumerdes,AlgeriaEarthquake
(M6.8)
Theepicentre:NorthernAlgeria,50kmeastofthe
capitalAlgiers(population3million)
NorthernAlgerialocatedatthemarginbetweenthe
northmovingAfricanplateandtheEurasianplate
2,287peopledead,morethan11,000injured
About182,000housingunits(apartmentsandprivate
houses)damaged(includingmorethan19,000units
beyondrepair)
The Impact
Over180,000homeless
Economicloss>US$5billion
(10%ofAlgeriastotalGDPfor2001)
30
Tectonic Plates
Algeria
Algiers,Algeria:StoneMasonryConstruction
Manyurbanbuildingsconstructedbefore
1960areofstonemasonryconstruction
Mediumrisebuildings(56storeys)
Stonemasonrywallsandvaultedbrick
floors(jackarch)
Notsignificantlydamagedinthe2003
earthquake(comparedtoreinforced
concretebuildings)
62
31
StoneMasonryBuildingsinAlgiers,Algeria
World Housing Encyclopedia, Algeria www.world-housing.net
63
StoneMasonryConstruction Floor
andRoofSystems
64
32
EarthquakeDamage
Credit: M. Farsi
65
A partial stone wall collapse in a 5-storey

building, Algiers (Photo: M. Farsi)
66
33
2005KashmirEarthquake
Morethan70,000deathsinPakistan,mostlydue
tostonemasonryconstruction
67
NominallyReinforcedMasonry:Stone
MasonryExample
Model SM1: URM
Model SM3: with RCC bands
NED University, Peshawar, Pakistan

Source: Ali, Qaisar, et al., 2010. Shake Table Tests on Typical Stone Masonry
Buildings Used in the Himalayan Belt, Paper No. 1414, Proceedings of the 9th
U.S. National and 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Toronto, Canada.
No. 68
34
Shake-table Testing of Stone Masonry Construction in

Pakistan
Stone masonry walls and RC roof

Source: Qaisar Ali, NED University, Peshawar, Pakistan
69
Questions
No. 70
35

Handouts-Seismic Load Distribution at A Floor Level

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Handouts-Seismic Load Distribution at A Floor Level

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Lecture Handouts

Short Course on Seismic Design of Reinforced and Confined Masonry Buildings

No diaphragm is perfectly rigid or perfectly flexible

Note: flexural deflections are usually predominant in

Z D = natural frequency of floor diaphragm when shear walls

=natural frequency of the system when floor diaphragm is

Source: Englekirk&Hart (1984)

I e = effective moment of inertia for diaphragm

Lateral Load (w kN/m)

WallB: w(L1 +L2)/2

Next, the coordinates of the

' solid  ' strip  ' ABCD

Table 2. Wall X 1 Stiffness Calculations

Table 3. Wall Y1 Stiffness Calculations

In addition, an accidental eccentricity needs to be considered, as follows:

The torsional moment is determined

700 * 2.37 | 1660 kNm

c xi , c yi - distance of the wall

0.3 * >(9m * 30m) * (3.5kPa  0.6kPa )  2.4m * 30m * 5.38kPa @ 448kN

299kN (opposite direction from RY 1a is required to satisfy

RY 1a  Vw 747  0.3 * 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa 782kN

Shear forces in the walls Y1b and Y3 (diaphragm D2):

0.3 * >(9m * 9m) * (3.5kPa  0.6kPa)  2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa @ 134.5kN

VY 1b RY 1b  Vw 67  0.3 * 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa 102kN

Shear forces in walls Y2 and Y3 :

Shear forces (kN)

240 *10 ) * 9.0

Next, the translational displacement at point A can be calculated as follows:

7.59 *10 5 rad

where (see the torsional calculations performed in part a) of this example)

7.59 *10 5 * 24.05m 1.82mm

0.82  1.82 *1.5 *1.5

0.3 * >(9m * 21m) * (3.5kPa  0.6kPa)  2.4m * 21m * 5.38kPa @ 314kN

and the equivalent uniform load is equal to

chord area (two grouted 240 mm blocks)

masonry modulus of elasticity based on f mc = 10.0 MPa (solid grouted 20

Short Course on Seismic Design of Reinforced and Confined Masonry Buildings

Flexible floor diaphragm

Re-entrant Corners or Horizontal

Wall with Openings

Lateral Torsional Coupling

One Story Torsionally Coupled

Flexible side elements are critical

Torsionally stiff system

Stiff side elements are critical

Same lateral stiffness

Seismic Code Provisions

IS 1893( I ): =1.5; 1.0, 0.05

Reference Point: Center of Rigidity (CR),

Taken into account in design eccentricity

Dynamic torsional moment

at base divide by base shear

Dynamic amplification is the

often greater than 1.0

Definition of Reference Point

Roller-Model for Torsional

Fd FCR FCM FCR RAC

Locating the Reference Points

Locating Ref Points

Locating Ref Points

Locating Ref Points

Locating Ref Points

Locating Ref Points

' solid ' strip ' ABCD

0.3 * >(9m * 30m) * (3.5kPa 0.6kPa ) 2.4m * 30m * 5.38kPa @ 448kN

299kN (opposite direction from RY 1a is required to satisfy

RY 1a Vw 747 0.3 * 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa 782kN

0.3 * >(9m * 9m) * (3.5kPa 0.6kPa) 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa @ 134.5kN

VY 1b RY 1b Vw 67 0.3 * 2.4m * 9m * 5.38kPa 102kN

240 10 ) 9.0

7.59 *10 5 rad

7.59 10 5 24.05m 1.82mm

0.82 1.82 1.5 1.5

0.3 * >(9m * 21m) * (3.5kPa 0.6kPa) 2.4m * 21m * 5.38kPa @ 314kN