PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF HIGH-RISE SHEAR WALL

WITH OUTRIGGERS AND BASEMENT FIN WALLS

ON NON-RIGID FOUNDATION
J.C.D. Hoenderkamp, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands

36th Conference on OUR WORLD IN CONCRETE & STRUCTURES: 14 - 16 August 2011,

Singapore

Article Online Id: 100036034

The online version of this article can be found at:
http://cipremier.com/100036034

Thisarticleisbroughttoyouwiththesupportof
SingaporeConcreteInstitute
www.scinst.org.sg

AllRightsreservedforCIPremierPTELTD
YouarenotAllowedtoredistributeorresalethearticleinanyformatwithoutwrittenapprovalof
CIPremierPTELTD
VisitOurWebsiteformoreinformation
www.cipremier.com

th

36 Conference on Our World in Concrete & Structures

Singapore, August 14-16, 2011

PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF HIGH-RISE SHEAR WALL

WITH OUTRIGGERS AND BASEMENT FIN WALLS
ON NON-RIGID FOUNDATION
J.C.D. Hoenderkamp
Department of Architecture, Building and Planning
Eindhoven University of Technology
P.O. Box 513, Vertigo 9.18, 5600MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands
e-mail: <j.c.d.hoenderkamp@tue.nl> webpage: http://w3.bwk.tue.nl/en/

Keywords: Tall buildings, outriggers, shear walls, basement fin walls

Abstract. This paper presents a graphical method for locating the optimum position
of outriggers on shear walls with basement fin extensions for preliminary design of
high-rise stuctures subjected to horizontal loading. This location for the outrigger will
cause a maximum reduction in lateral deflection at the top of the building. The
method requires the input of seven structural parameters: bending stiffnesses for the
shear wall, outrigger and fin-walls, racking shear stiffness of the outrigger, an overall
bending stiffness contribution from the exterior columns, and rotational stiffnesses
for the shear wall and column foundations. These parameters allow the setting up of
two compatibility equations for rotations at the intersections of the neutral lines of the
shear wall with the outrigger and foundation structures. They yield expressions for
the restraining moments at outrigger and foundation level that act in the opposing
direction to the bending moment from the horizontal loading on the structure.
Maximising the influence of the restraining moments on the horizontal deflections
leads to the optimum location of the outrigger structure. Combining all stiffness
parameters into two non-dimensional characteristic stuctural parameters allows the
optimisation procedure for this type of structure to be represented by a single graph
that directly gives the optimum level of the outrigger. It further allows a rapid
assessment of the influence of the various structural components on the overall
behaviour of a high-rise structure in the early stages of the design.
1

INTRODUCTION

The outrigger braced high-rise shear wall structure in Figure 1 comprises a centrally located wall
with two equal length outrigger beams positioned at a distance from the top of the structure. The
cantilever outriggers are rigidly connected to the wall and pin-connected to columns at the perimeter of
the structure. Floor structures are taken to be hinge connected to the shear wall and columns, thereby
not participating in the lateral resistance of the building. The column-to-column connections are also
assumed to be non-moment resistant. The shear wall is rigidly connected to the foundation structure
that is founded on piles. In the basement of the building the central shear wall is extended with finwalls which reach the perimeter basement walls.
When horizontal load is applied to such a structure the wall will behave compositely with the exterior
structure by introducing a tension force in the windward exterior column and compression in the
leeward column. These forces form restraining moments Mr and Mf which act in the opposite direction
to the bending moment from the horizontal load as displayed by the analytical model in Figure 1. Both
effects will reduce the horizontal deflections of the structure and the bending moments in the shear

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

wall. Combined with the laterally applied load the restraining moments will force a triple-curvature in
the shear wall up the height of the structure.

outrigger
shear
wall
exterior
column

basement
fin-wall

ground
floor
slab

piled raft
perimeter basement wall

Figure 1: Shear wall structure with outriggers and basement fin extensions on piled raft foundation
In the horizontal deflection analysis of outrigger braced shear walls on fixed foundations it has been
shown [1,2] that the wall can be represented by a single flexural stiffness parameter, EIs. The
outriggers are taken to be prismatic members rigidly connected to the wall and hinge connected to the
exterior columns. The behaviour of these flexural members is represented by a bending stiffness, EIr
and a racking shear stiffness GAr. It was further assumed that the columns are pin connected to a
fixed foundation and could thus be represented by a parameter, EIc which represents the axial
stiffness of the columns, EAc. With four stiffness parameters for the wall, outriggers and exterior
columns it is possible to combine them in a single dimensionless parameter which allowed a graphical
procedure to obtain the optimum location of the outriggers such that they would cause the largest
reduction in horizontal deflection at the top of the structure. In a earlier attempt to take the flexibility of
foundation structures into account in the design of outrigger braced shear walls, a graphical method
was proposed [3] to obtain the optimum location of the outriggers for buildings on separate wall and
column foundations. The analysis used for that structural problem forms the basis for the suggested
method for preliminary design of high-rise shear walls with ourrigger bracing and basement fin-walls
on flexible foundations.
To develop a rapid method of analysis for preliminary design of a complicated structure, it is necessary
to introduce simplifications in order to take only the major modes of behaviour into account. Figure 2
shows a simplified analytical model to be used for the analysis of the outrigger braced structure. In the
structural analysis the individual elements are only subjected to forces resulting from horizontal
loading on the structure. The wide column behaviour of the shear wall is modeled by a flexural
member on the neutral axis of the wall with rigidly connected beams of infinite bending stiffness at
outrigger and foundation levels. The exterior columns are represented by pin-connected links only.
Their flexural stiffness is assumed to be negligible.
The pile foundations under the perimeter columns are assumed to act in a vertical direction only. They
are modeled as linear springs with a translational stiffness, k. The shear wall foundation is only
subjected to a bending moment. The net axial load on this foundation as a result of lateral loading is
zero as it is positioned in the center of a symmetric structure. The foundation of the wall can thus be
modelled by a rotational spring with a rotational stiffness, Cs. The basement fin-walls have a bending
stiffness, EIf. Further simplifying assumptions are: the structure behaves linear elastically; the
sectional properties of the shear wall, fin-walls, exterior columns and outriggers are uniform througout
their height or length; and the distribution of the lateral loading is uniformly distributed along the height
of the structure. Compatibility equations are to be developed for the rotations in the wall, outrigger and
foundation at the intersections of their neutral lines. This leads to two expressions for the restraining
moments allowing the reduction in horizontal deflection at the top to be determined. Maximising this
reduction will yield the optimum location of the outrigger.

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

outrigger
beam, wall or truss
horizontal load, w

basement
fin-wall
and
perimeter
wall

x
EIr, GAr

shear
wall

exterior
column

ground
floor
slab

EIs

EAc

Mf
EIf

piled
raft

Mr

Cs

k
piles

b
l

Figure 2: Outrigger-fin-wall structure and analytical model

2

ROTATIONS AT OUTRIGGER LEVEL

2.1 Shear Wall

The rotations in the shear wall are the result of a uniformly distributed horizontal load w, a
restraining moment Mr caused by a reverse action of the outriggers and restraining moment Mf from
the restraining action by the foundation structure. They will cause rotations at outrigger and ground
levels due to bending in the shear wall and rotation of its foundation as shown in Figure 3. For the
shear wall it will be assumed that plane sections remain plane in bending so that the rotations at the
shear wall center line are identical to those at the face of the wall.
Rotations due to lateral loading w
The rotation in the reinforced concrete shear wall at level x can be expressed as follows:

s;b;w =

w H3 x3
6EI s

(1)

where H is the total height of the structure, x is the distance measured from the top of the structure
and EIs is the flexural stiffness of the shear wall. The rotation of the foundation is

s;Cs ;w =

wH 2
2Cs

(2)

in which Cs is the rotational stiffness of the shear wall foundation.

s;b;w

s;b;Mr

s;Cs;w

s;Cs;Mr

s;Cs;Mf
H

EIs

EIs
Cs

Cs

Cs

Figure 3: Rotations in shear wall at outrigger

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

Rotations due to restraining moment Mr

The rotation in the shear wall at level x as a result of the restraining moment in the wall is given by

s;b;M r =

M r (H x )
EI s

(3)

The rotation in the shear wall due to rotation of the wall foundation can be expressed as follows

s;Cs ;M r =

Mr
Cs

(4)

Rotations due to restraining moment Mf

The rotation in the wall at outrigger level due to rotation of the shear wall foundation is

s;C s ;M f =

Mf
Cs

(5)

It is noted here that the rotations caused by the restraining moments are in the opposite direction to
those by horizontal load w.
2.2 Outrigger structure
The rotations in the outrigger structure at a distance x from the top of the building are the result of
the restraining actions by the reverse moments Mr and Mf. Figure 4 shows five rotations caused by
various deformations: (a) bending and (b) racking shear deformations in the outrigger trusses, (c)
deformations in the perimeter column foundation piles, (d) axial strain in the perimeter columns and
(e) deformations in the shear wall foundation piles. The floor structures at the top and bottom chords
are assumed to be not connected to the riggers, wall or columns. Continuous connections between
the floors and trusses would give the outriggers infinite bending stiffness.
(a)

Fr

r;b;Mr

EIr

Fr

r;Ck;Mr

(c)

r;Ck;Mf

EIr

Fr

(b)

Fr

Fr

GAr

H-x

r;s;Mr

Fr

r;a;Mr

(d)

(e)

GAr

Fr
b

Fr
l

Ff
Ff

Figure 4: Rotations of outrigger structure

Rotations in outrigger structure due to restraining force Mr
Figure 5 shows the deformed shape of a single outrigger which is jointed to the shear wall at a
distance x from the top of the structure. The rotations in the wall and outrigger are due to the
restraining moment Mr at this level. The diagram clearly shows the wide column action of the wall
forcing the outrigger truss not only to undergo rotations at its ends but also to translate upwards at the
wall-truss connection. The rotations in the outrigger structure caused by the restraining moment Mr are
in the anti-clockwise or negative direction.

r;b;M

M rb
24 2EI r

(6)

where b is the distance between the shear wall truss connection and the perimeter column, EIr is the
bending stiffness of the flexible part of the outrigger and

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

r;b;Mr

r;b;r

EIr

r;s;M

r;s;Mr

shear wall

GAr
shear wall

Fr
c

Fr

b
l

Figure 5: Bending and racking shear deformations in outrigger

l
b

(7)

in which l is the distance between the neutral line of the shear wall and an perimeter column.
The racking shear deformations in the outrigger truss are also shown in Figure 5. The wide column
behaviour of the shear wall causes a rotation within the truss as a result of strains in the diagonals in
addition to a rigid body rotation of the outrigger.

r;s;M r =

Mr
h 2GA r

(8)

The racking shear stiffness of an outrigger structure between the perimeter columns, GAr, is the sum
of the individual racking shear stiffnesses of all the bracing segments in two riggers
s

GA r = GA i
i =1

(9)

where s represents the total number of segments in the two outrigges and GAi is the racking shear
stiffness of a single segment. Racking shear stiffnesses for typical bracing segments have been
published earlier [2,3].
The axial shortening and lengthening of the perimeter columns will also cause an outrigger rotation

r;a;M r =

M r (H x )
EI c

(10)

where EIc is a global bending stiffness parameter pertaining to the axial stiffnesses of the perimeter
columns only and can be written as follows

EI c = 2l 2 EA c

(11)

in which Ac is the cross sectional area of a column.

Both restraining moments will cause differential settlement in the column foundations. The rotation in
the outrigger structure due to Mr is

r;C

k ;Mr

Mr
Ck

(12)

where Ck is an overall rotational stiffness parameter representing the vertical spring stiffness of the
piles of the column foundations

Ck = 2l 2k

(13)

in which k represents the translational stiffness of the piles of the column foundation.
Rotations in outrigger structure due to restraining force Mf
A rotation due to differential settlement of the perimeter column foundations by restraining moment Mf
can be expressed as follows

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

r;C

k ;M f

Mf
Ck

(14)

The rotation in the outrigger structure due to this moment is also in the anti-clockwise direction.
2.3 Compatibility equation at outrigger level
At outrigger level, a distance x from the top of the structure, the sum of the rotations in the shear
wall and the rotations in the outrigger structure at the intersection of their neutral lines is zero, thus

s + r = 0

(15)

substituting for the five rotations in the shear wall and five rotations in the outrigger structure yields the
following simplified compatibility equation

w H 3 x3
wH 2
=
+
6EI s
2Cs
(H x ) H x
1
b
1
1
1
1
Mr
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ Mf

2
2
EI c
EI s
6 EI r h GA r Cs Ck
Cs Ck

(16)

in which the restraining moments Mr and Mf are two unknowns.

3

ROTATIONS AT FOUNDATION LEVEL

The rotations in the shear wall at foundation level are caused by the uniformly distributed horizontal
load w in addition to restraining moments Mr and Mf. The rotations in the foundation structure are
caused by the restaining moments only.
3.1 Shear wall
The rotations in the shear wall at the base of the structure are all due to deformations in the shear
wall foundation as shown in Figure 6.

Mr

x
H

s;Cs;w
Cs

s;Cs;Mr

s;Cs;Mf
Cs

Cs

Mf

Figure 6: Rotations of shear wall at foundation level

Rotations due to lateral loading w
The rotation of the wall foundation caused by the laterally applied load is in a clockwise or positive
direction and can be expressed as

s;Cs ;w =

wH 2
2Cs

(17)

Rotations due to restraining moment Mr

The restraining moment at outrigger level will rotate the wall foundation in a counter clockwise or
negative direction. The foundation rotation then is

s;C s ;M r =

Mr
Cs

(18)

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

Rotations due to restraining moment Mf

The rotation of the wall foundation due to the restraining moment at the base of the structure becomes

s;Cs ;M f =

Mf
Cs

(19)

which is also in the counter clockwise direction.

f;Ck;Mr

f;b;Mf

Ibw

Ibw

k
l

f;Ck;Mf

k
a

k
a

Figure 7: Rotations in foundation structure

3.2 Foundation structure
The rotations in the foundation structure are the result of bending in the flexible fin walls and
deformations in the perimeter column foundations as shown in Figure 7.
Rotations due to restraining moment Mr
The restraining moment at outrigger level will cause a differential settlement in the perimeter column
foundations. The resulting rotation in the foundation structure is in the counter clockwise or negative
direction, thus

f;C

k ;Mr

Mr
Ck

(20)

Rotations due to restraining moment Mf

Similar to the rotations in the outrigger structure, the rotations in the foundation structure caused by
the restraining moment Mf are in the anti-clockwise or negative direction. For bending this will be

f;b;M f =

Mf l
6EI f

(21)

where EIf is the equivalent flexural stiffness of a prismatic foundation structure between the neutral
lines of the shear wall and the perimeter column. In case the stiffness of the perimeter column
foundations is such that they can be represented by rigid elements, the bending stiffness of the fin
walls becomes

l3

EI f = EI bw 3
3
b

(22)

where EIbw represents the bending stiffness of a fin wall between the edge of the shear wall and the
face of the perimeter basement wall, and a is the distance from the face of the perimeter basement
wall and the neutral line of the perimeter column.
The restraining moment at foundation level level will also cause a differential settlement in the exterior
column foundations resulting in a counter clockwise rotation of the foundation structure

f;C

k ;Mf

Mf
Ck

(23)

3.3 Compatibility equation at foundation level

At the base of the structure, the sum of the rotations in the shear wall and the rotations in the
foundation structure at the intersection of their neutral lines is zero, thus

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

s + f = 0

(24)

Substituting for the three rotations in the shear wall and three rotations in the foundation structure
leads to the following simplified compatibility equation

1
l
wH 2
1
1
1
= Mr
+
+
+
+ Mf

2Cs
Cs
Ck
Cs C k
6EI f

(25)

Similar to the compatability equation for rotation at outrigger level, here at foundation level the
restraining moments Mr and Mf are the only two unknowns.
4

LATERAL DEFLECTION AT THE TOP OF THE STRUCTURE

The two simultaneous compatibility equations, Eqs. (16) and (25) must now be solved for the
unknown restraining moments Mr and Mf. The complexity of the final expressions for these moments
can be simplified by reducing the seven characteristic stiffnesses of the total structure to two
characteristic flexiblity parameters and a non-dimensional constant. Setting

H
H
+
EI s EI c

(26)

b
1
K
K
+
+
+
2
C
C
6 EI r h GA r
s
k

(27)

l / 6EI f
l / 6EI f + 1 / Cs + 1 / Ck

(28)

Sv =
and

Sh =

where

K=

leads to an expression for the restraining moment at outrigger level

w H 3 x 3

wH 2
H
Mr =
K
+

2Cs
6EI s
(H x )S v + HSh

(29)

which causes a bending moment reduction on the wall foundation as well as in the shear wall between
outrigger level and the foundation. It will result in reduced horizontal deflections along the height of the
structure. The restraining moment at the base of the structure then becomes

Mf =

wH 2
2Cs

+ M r (K 1)
l / 6EI f

(30)

This moment will also cause a bending moment reduction on the wall foundation and reduce horizontal
deflections along the height of the structure.
The expression for the horizontal deflection at the top can be written as follows

y top =

wH 4
wH 3 M r H 2 x 2
M H M H

+
r f
8EI s
2Cs
2EI s
Cs
Cs

(31)

The last term in Eq. (31) represents the reduction in deflection of the wall due to restraining moment
Mf which after using Eq. (30) can be rewritten as

y s;C s ;M f =

wH 3 K
Mr H
(K 1)
+
2 l / 6EI
Cs
2Cs
f

The total deflection reduction of the wall due to both restraining moments then becomes

(32)

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

y red =

Mr
2EI s

2
2H 2 wH 3
2
H

x
+

+
H
2Cs2

l / 6EI f

(33)

where a characteristic non-dimensional parameter has been defined as

H =

Cs H
KEI s

(34)

The maximum deflection at the top of the structure can now be written as

y top =

wH 4
wH 3
H / EI s
M r 2
2H 2
2
+
1

H x +
( H )
8EI s
2Cs ( H ) (l / 6EI f ) 2EI s

(35)

Substituting for Mr into Eq. (35) leads to the following equation for the reduction in deflection

y red =

wH 5

12(EI s )2

1
1 x 2 x 3 + x 5 + 5 3x 2x + 6

2
H

1 x +
(
)
H

(36)

in which a characteristic dimensionless structural parameter is defined as follows

Sh
Sv

(37)

x=

x
H

(38)

and a location parameter as

The deflection reduction can be maximized by differentiating Eq. (36) w.r.t. x, setting it equal to zero
and solving for x. It can quite easily be shown that the outcome is a function of the two nondimensional parameters H and x/H only. This allows the setting up of a simple diagram as shown in
Figure 8 for determining the optimum location of the outrigger structure. For this location the reduction
in horizontal deflection is maximised.
0.2

Rigger Location, x/H

0.3

0.4

Values of H
> 100

0.5

10
6

0.6

4
3
2

0.7
0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Values of

Figure 8: Optimum location of outrigger

0.8

0.9

1.0

J.C.D. Hoenderkamp

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The assumption of infinitely stiff basement fin walls will reduce the constant K in Eq. (28) to a zero
value thereby giving the non-dimensional parameter H an infinite value. From the diagram in Figure 8
it can be seen that the outrigger will be located too high up the structure.
Giving the basement fin wall a zero stiffness will result in a maximum value for K, i.e. 1.0, which will
reduce the restraining moment at the base of the structure to zero. The parameter H now has a
minimum value and the outrigger will be placed too low down the structure. Solutions for this situation
have been given earlier [3].
Increasing the bending stiffness of the outrigger structure will reduce the value of the flexibility
parameter Sh thereby also reducing the non-dimensional parameter and thus locating the outrigger
too far down the structure
The suggested method of analysis for high-rise outrigger braced shear wall structures with basement
fin walls on flexible foundations allows the design engineer to:
determine the optimum location for an outrigger structure where it will cause a maximum
reduction in horizontal deflection at the top of the structure;
obtain the maximum horizontal displacement in addition to the bending moments in the
structure resulting from horizontal loading;
investigate the influence of the various structural components on the lateral stiffness
behaviour of the structure;
rapidly assess the overall behaviour of the structure in the very early stages of the design of a
proposed tall building structure and
check on the reasonableness of computer analyses.

REFERENCES:

[1]
[2]
[3]

B. Stafford Smith and I. Salim, Parameter study of outrigger-braced tall building structures,
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, 107, No. ST10, 1981, pp. 2001-2013.
B. Stafford Smith and A. Coull, Tall Building Structures, 1991, John Wiley & Sons, New York
J.C.D. Hoenderkamp, High-rise shear wall with outrigger trusses on wall and column foundations,
The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, USA. Vol. 13, No. 1, 2004, pp. 73-87