applied

sciences
Article
Analysis of the Stiffness Ratio at the Interim Layer
of Frame-Supported Multi-Ribbed Lightweight Walls
under Low-Reversed Cyclic Loading
Suizi Jia 1, *, Wanlin Cao 1 , Yuchen Zhang 2 and Quan Yuan 3
Received: 23 October 2015; Accepted: 11 January 2016; Published: 15 January 2016
Academic Editor: César Vasques
1 College of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, No.100, Pingleyuan,
Chaoyang District, Beijing 100124, China; 07814@bjut.edu.cn
2 Academy of Railway Sciences, Scientific & Technological Information Research Institute,
No. 2 Daliushu Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100081, China; zp521058@163.com
3 School of Civil Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, No.3 Shangyuancun, Haidian District,
Beijing 100044, China; 15910592401@163.com
* Correspondence: suizijia@163.com; Tel.: +86-10-6739-6617; Fax: +86-10-6739-6617

Abstract: By conducting low-reversed cyclic loading tests, this paper explores the load-bearing
performance of frame-supported multi-ribbed lightweight wall structures. The finite-element
software (OpenSees) is used to simulate the process with the shear wall width (at the frame-supported
layer) and different hole opening approaches (for multi-ribbed lightweight walls) as variables.
The conclusions reflect the influence of the stiffness ratio at the interim layer on the load-bearing
performance of the structure. On this basis, the paper identifies the preferable numerical range
for engineering design, which provides a solid foundation for the theoretical advancement of the
structures in this study.

Keywords: frame-supported structure; multi-ribbed lightweight wall; OpenSees; stiffness ratio;

interim layer

1. Introduction
The wide application of frame-supported structures serves the increasing demand for modern
buildings that are designed and constructed with multiple functions for various purposes. However,
the uneven distribution of stiffness and mass in the vertical direction may induce a sudden
change in structural stiffness under seismic influence, which undermines the overall structure [1–3].
Framework-masonry structures (FM structures), with a design scheme where the upper part is
relatively stronger than the lower part, have poor seismic resistance based on their behavior in previous
earthquakes [4]. The Olive View Medical Center in San Fernando, for instance, suffered from crashed
ground columns and buckled reinforced steel in the main building [5,6]. Another example occurred in
Skopje, Yugoslavia. A five-storey building on October Street (literally translated) was heavily damaged
at the ground floor which consisted of stores with no partition wall, while the upper floors—primarily
partitioned residences—were only slightly damaged. [7]. These findings were confirmed in China,
where FM structure stands were some of the most extensively damaged structures in both Wenchuan
and Yushu earthquakes (in Sichuan and Qinghai Province, respectively) [8]. Comparatively, the
masonry structure of framework seismic walls presents a good choice in terms of city reconstruction
and business decentralization. The China Academy of Building Research conducted an experimental
study on the seismic performance of a 1/2-scale-seven-floor brick house with a seismic wall framework.
The conclusions indicate that, as the weak layer emerges, elastic-plastic deformation takes place in

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21; doi:10.3390/app6010021 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 2 of 19

a collective manner, which means that severe damage is likely to occur. Therefore, the study suggests
that the stiffness ratio at the interim layer falls somewhere between 1.2 and 2.0 [9]. Xi’an University
of Architecture and Technology conducted quasi-dynamic response tests to using 1/2-scale models,
where a two-layer framework seismic wall supports a four-layer brick house. The results show the
peak values for the seismic shear force and for the moment occur at the interim layer, which remains
vulnerable to external force. Therefore, to enhance the lateral stiffness and load-bearing performance
in the horizontal direction, structural columns are added to the middle of the interim layer for further
support. In the meantime, the stiffness ratio between the third layer and the second layer is between
1.2 and 1.4, whereas that between the second and the first should not exceed 1.4 [4].
The frame-work shear wall structure delivers strong performance in seismic resistance. Although
a ground shear wall with increased wall thickness can cope with any sudden change in stiffness at
the interim layer, its overuse undermines the layout design and the daily function of the building.
At the same time, frame-supported columns tend to be underused as they bear only limited shear
force during earthquakes [10]. Both Japan and South Korea have placed frame-supported shear wall
structures under quasi-dynamic and vibration tests. The majority of the structural damage is noticed
in the frame, whereas the upper structure remains in the elastic stage. In other words, the overall
specimen is unevenly damaged [11,12]. The Southeast University of China (Jiangsu Province) scaled
a reinforced framework structure with the bottom layer of a large bay supported by specially shaped
columns to 1/6 of the prototype and performed seismic simulations on a vibration test rig. The damage
could be categorized as structural damage of the beam hinge. As the plastic hinge at the beam end
develops, the wall corners crack; therefore, stronger corner design is highly recommended [13]. Several
researchers and scholars have studied the seismic design of frame-supported structures, which tend to
display an uneven distribution of stiffness and mass. The results show that the inter-layer displacement
and ductility increase with decreasing stiffness and strength of the first layer. Therefore, the use of
a multiple-defense design in the upper structure is recommended to mitigate the accumulation of
damage and withstand collapse in an aftershock [14,15].
On this basis, this paper suggests multi-ribbed lightweight wall for the construction of buildings
with large spaces at the bottom, which helps to create a new structural system—frame-supported
multi-ribbed lightweight wall structure (FSMRL wall structure). The paper presents low-reversed
cyclic loading tests of differential-span FSMRL wall structures with their scales reduced by half of
the prototype. The finite-element software (OpenSees) [16] is used to simulate the load-bearing
performance of the specimens with variable stiffness ratios at the interim layer. Thanks to this
application, the paper identifies the numerical range of the stiffness ratio for engineering design.

2. Multi-Ribbed Lightweight Wall Structure

The multi-ribbed lightweight wall structure (or MRL wall structure), with a layer-by-layer
embedded design, is composed of cast-in-situ concealed frames, layer slabs and prefabricated MRL
walls [17,18], which can be further divided into environmentally friendly embedded lightweight blocks
and densely arranged ribbed beams and ribbed columns. The frame, constructed of reinforced concrete
edge columns, connected columns and concealed beams, restrains the displacement of the wall. These
parts make up the major load-bearing members of the structure, namely the MRL wall (see Figure 1).
Compared with structures of similar functions, MRL wall structures offer the
following advantages:

(1) Outstanding structural integrity and working performance

The manufacturing technique promises consistent deformation between the MRL wall, concealed
frame and layer slab, which then work together to bear the exerted force. From an overall perspective,
the MRL wall can be viewed as a composite material structure, with the lightweight blocks acting as
the matrix and the ribbed grid as the reinforced fiber. With smaller mechanical difference between
the grid and blocks, the structure works as a new type of load-bearing member, standing out for its
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 3 of 19

strength
Appl.and overall
Sci. 2016, 6, 21 integrity. It needs to be pointed out that the blocks and the ribbed grid—mutually
restraint and coordinately functioned—contribute to greater stiffness, which means block cracking only
occursblock
withincracking only occurs
a certain range within
under acyclic
certainloading.
range under
The cyclic
cracksloading. The cracks
then tend then
to close uptend
underto close
reversed
up under reversed loading, in other words the blocks—though cracked—still bear
loading, in other words the blocks—though cracked—still bear the exerted force and participate the exerted force in
and participate in lateral force resistance [19].
lateral force resistance [19].

(a) (b)
Figure 1. Sketch map of a multi-ribbed lightweight wall structure; (a) Multi-ribbed lightweight wall
Figure 1. Sketch map of a multi-ribbed lightweight wall structure; (a) Multi-ribbed lightweight wall
structure; (b) Multi-ribbed lightweight wall.
structure; (b) Multi-ribbed lightweight wall.
(2) Multiple seismic lines of defense
(2) Multiple
From seismic lines ofof
the perspective defense
the applied material, the embedded block is composed of a brittle
material with strong stiffness, whereas the multi-ribbed grid and the concealed frame use reinforced
From the perspective of the applied material, the embedded block is composed of a brittle material
concrete, which has high ductility. Overall, the structure has average stiffness, with a load-bearing
with strong stiffness,
performance whereas
greater than the theframework
multi-ribbed grid and
structure, butthe
lessconcealed framewall
than the shear usestructure.
reinforced concrete,
Under
whichhorizontal
has high loading,
ductility.the Overall,
lightweightthe structure
blocks with haslowaverage
elasticstiffness,
moduli are withtheafirst
load-bearing performance
to crack. However,
greater
duethan the
to the framework
restraint of the structure,
ribbed grid,but theless thanenergy
seismic the shear wall structure.
is dissipated Under between
through friction horizontal loading,
blocks,
the lightweight
forming the blocks withline
first seismic lowofelastic
defense. moduli
Thanksare thecriss-crossed
to the first to crack. However,
ribbed beams and dueribbed
to thecolumns,
restraint of
better plane
the ribbed interaction
grid, the seismic(i.e., densely
energy arranged ribbed
is dissipated beams
through and ribbed
friction betweencolumns formforming
blocks, cross grids,
the first
and increase the in-plane stability of the MRL wall)—together with the
seismic line of defense. Thanks to the criss-crossed ribbed beams and ribbed columns, better plane support of the lightweight
blocks—results
interaction in stronger
(i.e., densely arranged structural stiffness
ribbed beams andin ribbed
comparison
columnswithform
that cross
of thegrids,
concealed frame. the
and increase
Therefore, the structure is prone to collapse before its counterpart does, forming the second seismic
in-plane stability of the MRL wall)—together with the support of the lightweight blocks—results in
line of defense. In the final stage of force bearing, the cooperation between the concealed frame and
stronger structural stiffness in comparison with that of the concealed frame. Therefore, the structure
the ribbed columns withstands the external force applied, preventing the occurrence of structural
is prone to collapse
collapse in majorbefore
seismicits counterpart does,
incidence—hence forming
the third seismicthe second
line seismic line of defense. In the
of defense.
final stagePrevious
of forcestudies
bearing, the cooperation between the concealed
and analysis show that the failure process-the graded frame andprocess
the ribbed columns
of energy
withstands the external force applied, preventing the occurrence of structural
consumption—for instance—starts with the lightweight blocks, then moves to the grids and finally collapse in major seismic
incidence—hence
to the concealed theframe,
thirdallseismic
of which line of defense.
make up the multiple seismic lines of defense [20].
Previous
(3) Easy adjustment of structural stiffnessthat the failure process-the graded process of energy
studies and analysis show
consumption—for instance—starts with the lightweight blocks, then moves to the grids and finally to
The adjustment of the stiffness in lateral force resistance can be achieved by changing the block
the concealed frame, all of which make up the multiple seismic lines of defense [20].
material, the grid layout and the dimensions of the ribbed beams and ribbed columns. As the MRL
(3) wall
Easystructure
adjustmentcan easily cooperate
of structural with other structural system(s), it promises easy adjustment of
stiffness
stiffness distribution and force-bearing capacity [21].
The
(4) adjustment of thelimited
Low dead weight, stiffness in lateral duration,
construction force resistance can be
and tangible achieved
benefits byenergetic,
on the changingsocial,
the block
material, environmental,
the grid layoutandand the dimensions
economic fronts of the ribbed beams and ribbed columns. As the MRL
wall structure can easily cooperate with other structural system(s), it promises easy adjustment of
The dead weight of the MRL wall structure is approximately 7.2 kN/m2, equivalents to 65% of
stiffness distribution and force-bearing capacity [21].
that of a brick masonry structure, 68% of that of a frame structure, and 72% of that of a shear-wall
structure. Engineering practice has found that the MRL wall structure cuts the civil cost by 4%–6%
(4) Low dead weight, limited construction duration, and tangible benefits on the energetic, social,
compared with masonry concrete structures, 10%–12% compared with framework structures, and
environmental, and economic fronts
more than 15% compared with shear wall structures. At the same time, the thinner wall offers a
6%–8% increase in usable floorage. These figures confirm that this new structural system has great
The dead weight of the MRL wall structure is approximately 7.2 kN/m2 , equivalents to 65% of
potential for industrialization [22].
that of a brick masonry structure, 68% of that of a frame structure, and 72% of that of a shear-wall
structure. Engineering practice has found that the MRL wall structure cuts the civil cost by 4%–6%
3/19
compared with masonry concrete structures, 10%–12% compared with framework structures, and
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 4 of 19

more than 15% compared with shear wall structures. At the same time, the thinner wall offers a 6%–8%
increase in usable floorage. These figures confirm that this new structural system has great potential
for industrialization [22].
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21
(5) Residence pilot projects
(5) Appl. Sci. 2016, 6,pilot
Residence 21 projects
As 1,000,000 m2 residence pilot projects have been constructed in Hebei, Shanxi, Henan and
(5)As Residence
1,000,000 pilot
m2 residence
projects pilot projects have been constructed in Hebei, Shanxi, Henan and
many other provinces [23], the MRL wall structure has achieved every aspect of social production
many other provinces2 [23], the MRL wall structure has achieved every aspect of social production
and practice As(see
1,000,000
Figure m 2),
residence
and our pilot projects
efforts have been
toward constructed
this end in Hebei,both
have yielded Shanxi, Henan and
economic and social
and practice (see Figure 2), and our efforts toward this end have yielded both economic and social
results. many
In other
reference provinces
to the [23],
Code the MRL
for wall
Masonry structure
Structure has achieved
Design every aspect
(GB50003-2011),of social production
the Load Code for
results. In reference
and practice to the2),
(see Figure Code
and for
our Masonry Structure
efforts toward Design
this end have(GB50003-2011), the Load
yielded both economic andCode
socialfor
Building Structures
Building (GB50009-2012), the Code for the Design of Concrete Structures (GB50010-2010),
results.Structures
In reference(GB50009-2012),
to the Code forthe Code for
Masonry the Design
Structure Designof Concrete Structures
(GB50003-2011), (GB50010-2010),
the Load Code for
and the Code
andBuilding for
the Code Seismic
for Seismic
Structures Design
Design ofofBuildings
(GB50009-2012), the Code (GB
Buildings (GBthe
for 50011-2010),
50011-2010), theMinistry
the
Design of Concrete Ministry of(GB50010-2010),
Housing
of Housing
Structures and and
UrbanUrban
Development,
Development, P.R.P.R.
and the Code for China,
China, hashas
Seismic issued
issued
Design theindustrial
ofthe industrial
Buildings standard—the
standard—the
(GB 50011-2010), the Directive
Directive
Ministry ofRules for for
Rules
Housing Multi-Ribbed
andMulti-Ribbed
Urban
Lightweight
Lightweight WallWall
Development, Structures—which
Structures—which
P.R. China, has issued became
became
the effective
effective
industrial fromfrom 1 June
1 June
standard—the 20142014 (JGJ/T275-2013).
(JGJ/T275-2013).
Directive Rules Detailsabout
Details
for Multi-Ribbed
about the design
Lightweight and
Wall construction
Structures—which are provided
became
the design and construction are provided in Figure 3 [24]. in Figure
effective 3
from[24].
1 June 2014 (JGJ/T275-2013). Details
about the design and construction are provided in Figure 3 [24].

Figure
Figure 2. 2. Residence
Residence
Figure 2. Residence
pilot
pilot projects
projects
pilot projects
using
using the
the
using
system—frame-supported
thesystem—frame-supported
multi-ribbed
multi-ribbed
system—frame-supported multi-ribbed
lightweight wall wall
lightweight
lightweight wall
structure
structure (FSMRL
(FSMRL
structure for short)
for short)
(FSMRL wall
wallwall
for short) structure.
structure.
structure.

(a)
(a)

(b)
(b)
Figure 3. Details of the design and construction of FSMRL wall structures. (a) Slab joints; (b) Structure
Figure 3. Details of the design and construction of FSMRL wall structures. (a) Slab joints; (b) Structure
construction
Figure process.
3. Details of the design and construction of FSMRL wall structures. (a) Slab joints; (b) Structure
construction process.
construction process.
3. Low-Reversed Cyclic Loading Test on FSMRL Wall Structure
3. Low-Reversed
3. Low-ReversedCyclic Loading
Cyclic
In accordance withLoading
Test
Teston
on FSMRL
FSMRL
a frame-supported
WallStructure
Wall Structure
brick masonry structure [4], the specimen is designed to
withstand
In accordancean earthquake
with
In accordance with an intensity brick
a frame-supported
with a frame-supported level
brickofmasonry
eight when
masonry the site [4],
structure
structure soil is type
[4],
the the II. Builtisondesigned
specimen
specimen theories
is designed
to to
withstand
withstand an earthquake
an earthquake with
with anan intensitylevel
intensity level of
of eight
eight when
whenthethesite
sitesoil is type
soil II. Built
is type on theories
II. Built on theories
4/19

4/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 5 of 19

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21

applied in the field, the specimen is scaled to 1/2 of the prototype (see Figure 4), and the preparation is
appliedby
performed in anchoring
the field, the specimen
the is scaled to 1/2
rib reinforcement of the
of the MRLprototype
wall in(see
theFigure
upper4),half
andtothe preparation
the edge columns
is performed by anchoring the rib reinforcement of the MRL wall
at each end and the head beams, whereas the wall is laid on the frame-supported beam in the upper half to the (FS
edgebeam)
columns at each end and the head beams, whereas the wall is laid on the frame-supported beam
using the bed mortar method [24,25]. Tables 1–3 provide the key parameters of reinforcement, concrete
(FS beam) using the bed mortar method [24,25]. Tables 1–3 provide the key parameters of
and block material. The applicationt aims to unveil the influence of the stiffness ratio (at the interim
reinforcement, concrete and block material. The applicationt aims to unveil the influence of the
layer)stiffness
on the load-bearing performance of the overall structure. Additionally, the authors conducted
ratio (at the interim layer) on the load-bearing performance of the overall structure.
a height
Additionally, the authorslayer
cut to the bottom to avoid
conducted anycutpremature
a height cracking
to the bottom of theany
layer to avoid frame-supported
premature cracking columns
of
(FS columns).
the frame-supported columns (FS columns).

(a)

(b)

(c) (d)

(e)
Figure 4. Structural diagram of the FSMRL wall. (a) FSMRL-1 Differential-span FSMRL wall without holes;
Figure 4. Structural diagram of the FSMRL wall. (a) FSMRL-1 Differential-span FSMRL wall without
(b) FSMRL-2 Differential-span FSMRL wall with holes; (c) The reinforcement for the outer frame; (d)
holes; (b) FSMRL-2 Differential-span FSMRL wall with holes; (c) The reinforcement for the outer
The reinforcement for the ribbed beam and ribbed column; (e) Reinforcement details of the cross section.
frame; (d) The reinforcement for the ribbed beam and ribbed column; (e) Reinforcement details of the
cross section.
5/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 6 of 19

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21

Table 1. Concrete test results.

Table 1. Concrete test results.

Ribbed Beam and Edge Column and
Major Member Frame at the Bottom
Ribbed
RibbedColumn
Beam and Connected Column
Edge Column and
Major Member Frame at the Bottom
Cubic compression strength/MPa 34.13 Ribbed
30.02Column Connected
32.27 Column
4 ˆ 104 104
Cubic Elastic modulus/MPa
compression strength/MPa 3.1134.13
ˆ 10 2.98 30.02 3.09 ˆ
32.27
Elastic modulus/MPa 3.11 × 10 4 2.98 × 104 3.09 × 104
Table 2. Steel bar test results.
Table 2. Steel bar test results.
Specification φ6 φ8 φ12 φ14 φ20
Specification Ф6 Ф8 Ф12 Ф14 Ф20
Area/mm 2 28.3 50.3 113.1 153.9 314.2
Area/mm 2 28.3 50.3 113.1 153.9 314.2
Yield strength/MPa 430.55 613.06 367.42 441.76 525.33
Yield strength/MPa
Strength limit/MPa 430.55
533.14 613.06
644.90 367.42
527.54 441.76
576.03 525.33
739.02
Strength
Elastic limit/MPa 2.14533.14
modulus/MPa ˆ 105 644.90
2.11 ˆ 105 527.54
2.03 ˆ 10 5 576.03
2.12 ˆ 10 5 739.02
2.08 ˆ 105
Elastic modulus/MPa 2.14 × 10 2.11 × 105
5 2.03 × 105 2.12 × 105 2.08 × 105
Table 3. Block test results.
Table 3. Block test results.
Dry Density (kN/m3 )3 Compression Strength/MPa Tensile Strength/MPa Elastic Modulus/MPa
Dry Density (kN/m ) Compression Strength/MPa Tensile Strength/MPa Elastic Modulus/MPa
7.32
7.32 4.15
4.15 0.42
0.42 3 3
2.25׈1010
2.25

See Figure
See Figure 55 for
for the
the model
model preparation
preparation of
of the
the specimens.
specimens.

(a)

(b)
Figure 5.
Figure 5. The
The fabrication
fabricationof
ofthe
thespecimens.
specimens.(a)
(a)The
Thepreparation
preparation
of of
thethe
MRLMRL wall;
wall; (b) (b)
TheThe making
making of
of the
the specimens
specimens in stages.
in stages.

The test setup shown in Figure 6 was used. The horizontal loading was exerted repetitively by
The test setup shown in Figure 6 was used. The horizontal loading was exerted repetitively by
the vertical oil-pumped jacks starting with a fixed force of 1000 kN. The prototype—a six-layered
the vertical oil-pumped jacks starting with a fixed force of 1000 kN. The prototype—a six-layered
structure—is put under an external force of 1000 kN on a layer basis, with the top four floors
structure—is put under an external force of 1000 kN on a layer basis, with the top four floors
loaded to the two layers in the bottom. With its scale reduced by half, the model bears a loading of
loaded to the two layers in the bottom. With its scale reduced by half, the model bears a loading of
1000 kN—1000 × 4 × 1/4 at the vertical direction). It needs to be noted that the low-reversed cyclic
1000 kN—1000 ˆ 4 ˆ 1/4 at the vertical direction). It needs to be noted that the low-reversed cyclic
loading test can be viewed as a quasi-static loading test where the loading rates can be slow.
loading test can be viewed as a quasi-static loading test where the loading rates can be slow. One
One single cyclic takes 10–15 min, which is then followed by a 5–10 min break to view the results.
single cyclic takes 10–15 min, which is then followed by a 5–10 min break to view the results. When
When the displacement sensor read a stable value, the horizontal loading was increased by a margin
of 30 kN repeatedly until yielding of the steel reinforcing bars in each specimen. Then, a new type of
loading pattern was applied, as the experimental parameters changed from force to displacement

6/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 7 of 19

the displacement sensor read a stable value, the horizontal loading was increased by a margin of
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21
Appl.
30 kNSci.repeatedly
2016, 6, 21 until yielding of the steel reinforcing bars in each specimen. Then, a new type of

loading
with pattern was applied, as the experimental parameters changed from force to displacement with
with aa fixed
fixed increase
increase of
of 55 mm
mm each
each time,
time, and
and the
the operation
operation was
was repeated
repeated immediately.
immediately. See
See Figure
Figure 77
afor
fixed increase of 5 mm each time, and the operation was repeated immediately. See Figure 7 for the
for the
the horizontal
horizontal loading
loading curves
curves for
for the
the two
two specimens.
specimens.
horizontal loading curves for the two specimens.

Figure 6.
6. The loading
loading device.
Figure 6. The
Figure The loading device.
device.

7. Low-reversed
Low-reversed horizontal-loading curve for FSMRL-1; (b) The
Figure 7. Low-reversed cyclic
Figure 7. cyclic loading
loading curve.
curve. (a)
(a) The
The horizontal-loading
horizontal-loading curve for FSMRL-1; (b) The
horizontal-loading curve for
curve for FSMRL-2.
FSMRL-2.
horizontal-loading curve for FSMRL-2.

The
The damage
damage of of the
the FSMRL
FSMRL wall
wall structure
structure goes
goes through
through three
three stages,
stages, namely,
namely, the
the stage
stage of
of
preliminary development (with the force control at 0.40 to 0.55 times the yield limit—P y), the stage of
preliminary development (with the force control at 0.40 to 0.55 times the yield limit—Py), the stage of
rapid
rapid development
development (with
(with the
the force
force control
control at
at 0.55
0.55 to
to 1.10
1.10 times
times the
the PPyy)) and
and the
the stage
stage of
of destruction
destruction
(displacement
(displacement control). While the previous two stages are service states, and the destruction stage
control). While the previous two stages are service states, and the destruction stage is
is
the ultimate state.
the ultimate state.
7/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 8 of 19

The damage of the FSMRL wall structure goes through three stages, namely, the stage of
preliminary development (with the force control at 0.40 to 0.55 times the yield limit—Py ), the stage
of rapid development (with the force control at 0.55 to 1.10 times the Py ) and the stage of destruction
(displacement control). While the previous two stages are service states, and the destruction stage is
the ultimate state.
At the stage of preliminary development, cracks are first found at the blocks, which then tend
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21
to close under reversed loading. At this point, the blocks, the ribbed beams, and the ribbed columns
work cooperatively.
At the stage In the lower partdevelopment,
of preliminary of the structure,
cracks minor
are first cracking occurs
found at the blocks,atwhich
the FS columns
then tend to and the
FS beams.close
As under reversedcontinues,
the loading loading. Atthe thiscracks
point, the blocks,
at the the ribbed beams,locations
above-mentioned and the ribbed columns
increase in quantity;
work cooperatively. In the lower part of the structure, minor cracking occurs at the FS columns and
during the stage of rapid development that follows, the existing cracks extend via the frame grids
the FS beams. As the loading continues, the cracks at the above-mentioned locations increase in
accompanied
quantity;byduring
exfoliation
the stage(of the blocks)
of rapid as plastic
development hinges
that follows, theare formed
existing cracksat the joints
extend via the of the ribbed
frame
beams andgrids accompanied by exfoliation (of the blocks) as plastic hinges are formed at the joints of the ribbedcolumns,
the ribbed columns. In the lower structure, cracks appear equidistantly on the FS
and cracks increase
beams and thein quantity
ribbed in In
columns. thetheFS beams.
lower As the
structure, destruction
cracks occurs, on
appear equidistantly thetheexperiment
FS columns, reaches
and cracks increase in quantity in the FS beams. As the destruction
an enduring stage. As the displacement amplitude increases, the load-bearing capacity occurs, the experiment reachesofanthe walls
enduring stage. As the displacement amplitude increases, the load-bearing capacity of the walls
decrease. More cracks can be noticed at the block-grid interface, and exfoliation occurs on a large-scale,
decrease. More cracks can be noticed at the block-grid interface, and exfoliation occurs on a large-
which results in theresults
scale, which destruction of some of
in the destruction blocks. Finally,
some blocks. concrete
Finally, crushing
concrete crushingat at the FS column
the FS column bases,
yielding bases,
of theyielding
longitudinal steels, andsteels,
of the longitudinal inter-layer slidingsliding
and inter-layer occuroccur
(See(See
Figure 8).8).
Figure

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 8.Figure
Three8.stages
Three stages of accumulative damage. (a) Preliminary development damaged stage; (b)
of accumulative damage. (a) Preliminary development damaged stage; (b) Rapid
Rapid development damaged stage; (c) Destruction stage.
development damaged stage; (c) Destruction stage.

8/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 9 of 19
4. Theoretical Determination of the Interim Stiffness Ratio for Frame-Supported Multi-Ribbed
Lightweight Walls
4. Theoretical Determination of the Interim Stiffness Ratio for Frame-Supported Multi-Ribbed
Lightweight Walls
4.1. The Regulations of Stiffness Ratio at the Interim Layer
4.1. The
TheRegulations of Stiffness Ratio
Technical Specification for at
thethe Interim Layer
Concrete Structure of Tall Building (JGJ3-2010) regulations in
the appendix E [26],Specification
The Technical where the interim
for the structural member is
Concrete Structure of defined as the(JGJ3-2010)
Tall Building componentregulations
set due to
layout or structural change(s) among the upper and lower floor, with some typical
in the appendix E [26], where the interim structural member is defined as the component set due examples being
to
interim
layout orbeam, interim
structural slab, interim
change(s) among truss,
the etc. Theand
upper located floor
lower of with
floor, such some
a component is referredbeing
typical examples to as
interim layer
beam, interim slab, interim truss, etc. The located floor of such a component is referred to as
On layer
interim this basis, the paper focuses on the up-and-down stiffness ratio at the interim layer of the
FSMRLOn wall structure
this basis, the (hereinafter
paper focusesrefers to as
on the stiffness ratiostiffness
up-and-down at the interim
ratio atlayer) and discusses
the interim layer of the
optimal numerical range accordingly. The stiffness ratio at the interim layer γ can be
FSMRL wall structure (hereinafter refers to as stiffness ratio at the interim layer) and discusses the
e calculated by
using Equation
optimal numerical(1). range accordingly. The stiffness ratio at the interim layer γe can be calculated by
using Equation (1). Δ H
γ e = ∆11 H11 (1)
γe “ Δ 2 H 2 (1)
∆2 H2

4.2. Stiffness
4.2. Stiffness Calculation
Calculation for
for the
the FSMRL
FSMRL Wall
Wall Structure
Structure
(1) For
(1) ForMRL
MRLwalls,
walls,the
theelastic
elasticstiffness
stiffnessin
inthe
thelateral
lateral force
force resistance
resistance (or K) can
(or K) can be
be calculated
calculated using
using
Equations (2)–(5) (shown in section 6) [27]
Equations (2)–(5) (shown in section 6) [27]
Based on
on previous
previouswall-related
wall-relatedexperiments,
experiments, thethe equations
equations incorporate
incorporate bending
bending deformation
deformation and
and structural
structural destruction
destruction and take
and take into account
into account the influence
the influence of concerned
of concerned variables,
variables, such such
as theasaxial
the
axial compressive
compressive ratio, ratio,
minorminor cracks,
cracks, andconstruction
and the the construction procedure.
procedure.
0.3ηcp2µ
0.3η (2μ N + 0.4)
1 =
N ` 0.4q
K1K“ H
c3
μ H (2)
H 3
+ µH (2)
12 EcII eq G
12E
`
GccAAeqeq
c eq

q E
A = A ＋ Eq A (3)
Aeqeq “ Acc ` E c Aq q (3)
Ec
= A
bbeqeq “ Aeqeq/{h
h (4)
(4)
1
I eq “=
Ieq bbeq h33
eq h
(5)
(5)
12
12
For MRL walls with holes, the calculation of the elastic stiffness in the lateral force resistance can
For MRL walls with holes, the calculation of the elastic stiffness in the lateral force resistance can
be conducted using Equation (6) (see Figure 9).
be conducted using Equation (6) (see Figure 9).

KK
1 “=
11 (6)
1 1 1
1 ` 1 (6)
KIII + KI ` KII
KΙΙΙ K Ι + KΙΙ

Figure
Figure 9.
9. Sketch
Sketch of
of the
the stiffness
stiffness calculation
calculation for
for MRL
MRL walls
walls with
with holes.
holes.

9/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 10 of 19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21

Note: KKII,, K
Note: KIIII and KIIII I Istand
and K standfor
forthe
thepiece-by-piece
piece-by-piececalculation
calculation results
results of
of the
the specimen
specimen stiffness
stiffness in
in
lateral force resistance, whereas the layer height H represents the height of the embrasure
lateral force resistance, whereas the layer height H represents the height of the embrasure or windowsill.
or windowsill.
(2) Stiffness calculation for reinforced concrete frame and seismic wall
(2) Stiffness calculation for reinforced concrete frame and seismic wall
The authors introduced the D-value method which can be expressed by Equation (7).
The authors introduced the D-value method which can be expressed by Equation (7).
12ic
K2 “ αc 122 ic (7)
K2 = αc h 2 (7)
h
(3) Calculation of layer stiffness
(3) Calculation of layer stiffness
The
Thecalculated
calculatedvalue
valuefor
forthe
thelayer
layerstiffness
stiffnessisisderived
derivedfrom
fromthe
thelinear
linearsuperposition
superpositionof
ofthe
theframe
frame
stiffness and the MRL wall stiffness (see Equation (8)).
stiffness and the MRL wall stiffness (see Equation (8)).

KK“= KK11`+  K K2
ÿ ÿ
2 (8)
(8)
Engineering practice normally reserves a large space in the lower layer of the FSMRL wall
Engineering practice normally reserves a large space in the lower layer of the FSMRL wall
structure. However, to avoid the early occurrence of FS column failure, this paper shortens the
structure. However, to avoid the early occurrence of FS column failure, this paper shortens the
columns and introduces reinforcement measures. The height cut is conducted proportionally; the
columns and introduces reinforcement measures. The height cut is conducted proportionally; the layer
layer height—which is 2.6 m in practice—is 1.3 m in this paper. The paper makes use of the
height—which is 2.6 m in practice—is 1.3 m in this paper. The paper makes use of the finite-element
finite-element software OpenSees ([16]) to simulate the influence of height changes in the FS layer on
software OpenSees ([16]) to simulate the influence of height changes in the FS layer on the load-bearing
the load-bearing performance of the overall structure. The height of the FS layer is set at 1.3 m, 1.4 m,
performance of the overall structure. The height of the FS layer is set at 1.3 m, 1.4 m, 1.5 m, 1.6 m,
1.5 m, 1.6 m, or 1.7 m to simulate an actual structure with a layer height of 2.6 m, 2.8 m, 3.0 m, 3.2 m, or
or 1.7 m to simulate an actual structure with a layer height of 2.6 m, 2.8 m, 3.0 m, 3.2 m, or 3.4 m
3.4 m respectively. The model provides a comparative diagram for skeleton curves, which are
respectively. The model provides a comparative diagram for skeleton curves, which are displayed as
displayed as follows (see Figure 10).
follows (see Figure 10).

Figure 10. Comparative

Figure10. Comparativediagram
diagramfor
forthe
theskeleton
skeletoncurves
curvesof
ofthe
themodels.
models.

UsingEquation
Using Equation(2)
(2)to
toEquation
Equation(8),
(8),the
thestiffness
stiffnessratio
ratio(at
(atthe
theinterim
interimlayer)
layer)can
canbebe determined
determinedfor
for
specimenswith
specimens withdifferent
differentframe
frameheights.
heights.Table
Table44shows
showsthe
therelation
relationbetween
betweenthe
thestiffness
stiffnessratio
ratioand
andthe
the
structure’scrack,
structure’s crack,yield,
yield,and
andpeak
peakloading
loading(see
(seeFigure
Figure11).
11).

Table4.4.Stiffness
Table Stiffnessratio
ratioat
atthe
theinterim
interimlayer
layerwith
withdifferent
differentframe
framesupported
supported(FS)
(FS)layer
layerheights.
heights.

Height
Height of FS Layer
of FS Layer(mm)
(mm) 1300
1300 1400
1400 1500
1500 1600
1600 1700
1700
Stiffness ratio at the interim layer 1.66 2.02 2.42 2.88 3.39
Stiffness ratio at the interim layer 1.66 2.02 2.42 2.88 3.39

10/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 11 of 19
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2016,
2016, 6,
6, 21
21

Figure 11.
Figure
Figure 11. Relation
11. between the
Relation between
between the interim
the interim stiffness
interim stiffness ratio
stiffness ratio and
ratio and load-bearing
and load-bearing performance.
load-bearing performance.
performance.

Figure 11
Figure 11 shows
shows that that the
the overall
overall curves
curves for
curves for thethe crack,
the crack, yield,
crack, yield, and
yield, and peakpeak loading
loading decrease
loading decrease with with
increasing stiffness
increasing stiffness ratio. ratio.
ratio. A A closer
Acloser
closerlooklook shows
lookshows that,
showsthat, comparatively,
that,comparatively,
comparatively,the the crack-loading
thecrack-loading
crack-loadingcurve curve follows
followsaa
curvefollows
more
amore steady
moresteady variation
steadyvariation pattern,
variationpattern, whereas
pattern,whereas
whereasthe the decrease
thedecrease of
decreaseofofthe the other
the other two
other two variables
two variables
variables is is steeper,
is steeper, which which
indicatesthat
indicates
indicates thatthe
that thestiffness
the stiffnessratio
stiffness ratio
ratio hashas
has aa stronger
stronger
a stronger influence
influence
influence on structural
on
on the the structural
the structural strength
strength
strength at theatatyielding
the yielding
the yielding
stage
stage and
stageunder
and under
and under peak loading.
peak loading.
peak loading.
Stiffness adjustment
Stiffness adjustment
adjustmentof of the
ofthe FS
theFS layer
FSlayer
layer and
andand hole
hole
hole opening
opening
opening of the
of the MRL
MRL
of the MRL wallwall
wall are performed
are performed
are performed in an
in an effort
effort
in an
to obtain
to obtain
effort different
different
to obtain stiffness
stiffness
different ratios,
ratios,
stiffness either
either
ratios, greater
greater
either greater than
than thanor
or orsmaller
smaller
smaller than
than 1. The
than1.1.The authors
Theauthors
authors againagain
again useuse
OpenSees to
OpenSees to simulate
simulate the the load
load bearing
bearing process
process to to identify
identify the the preferable
preferable stiffness
stiffness ratio
ratio for
for the
the interim
interim
layer of the FSMRL wall structure [16,28]. In the simulation of the
layer of the FSMRL wall structure [16,28]. In the simulation of the specimen’s physical performance, specimen’s physical performance,
the material-specialized
the material-specialized model model Concrete02
Concrete02 (provided(provided by by OpenSees
OpenSees [16])—which
[16])—which takes takes intointo account
account
account
the concrete’s strength and linear tensile emollescence—is
the concrete’s strength and linear tensile emollescence—is applied in the study of the applied in the study of the constitutive
the constitutive
constitutive
relation of
relation of the
the concrete
concrete (see
concrete (see Figure
(see Figure 12).
Figure 12). The
12). The uniaxial
uniaxial material
uniaxial material model
material model (Hysteretic
(Hysteretic Material)
Material) is is chosen
chosen
for the simulation
for the simulation of rebar,of rebar, because
rebar, because
because the the model
the model
model does does not eliminate the stiffness degradation
does not eliminate the stiffness degradation upon the upon the
removal
removal of of the
of the external
theexternal
externalforce,force,
force,and and it
andit itis isis fully
fully
fully able able
able to reflect
to reflect
to reflect the
the the pinching
pinching
pinching effect,
effect,
effect, (see
(see (see
Figure Figure
Figure 13).
13).
13). The
The
The beam-column
beam-column unit
unit makes
makes use
use of
of the
the non-linear
non-linear fiber
fiber model
model
beam-column unit makes use of the non-linear fiber model that OpenSees provides in its simulation that
that OpenSees
OpenSees provides
provides in
in its
its
simulation
simulation
(see Figure (see(see Figure
14). Figure 14). In accordance
14). In accordance
In accordance with the equivalent
with the equivalent
with the equivalent principle of principle
principle
compressive of compressive
of compressive
stiffness and stiffness
stiffness and
and
bending
bending
bending stiffness,
stiffness, the
the MRL
MRL wall
wall is
is analyzed
analyzed as
as a
a reinforced
reinforced concrete
concrete
stiffness, the MRL wall is analyzed as a reinforced concrete plate, where the ShellMITC4 unit (model plate,
plate, where
where the
the ShellMITC4
ShellMITC4 unit
unit
(model provided
(model
provided provided
by OpenSees) by OpenSees)
by OpenSees)
is defined is defined
is defined
by by aa multi-layered
by
a multi-layeredmulti-layered
shell elementshell element
shell element [29,30].
[29,30]. [29,30].

Figure 12.
Figure
Figure 12. Stress-strain
12. Stress-strain relation
relation of
of concrete.
concrete.

11/19
11/19
Appl.
Appl.
Appl. Sci.
Appl.Sci. 2016,
Sci.2016, 6,
2016,6, 21
6,21
21 12 of 19

Figure
Figure 13.
13. Skeleton curve
Skeleton curve of
of the
the hysteretic
hysteretic material
material...
Figure
Figure13. Skeleton curve
13.Skeleton curve of
of the
the hysteretic
hysteretic material
material.

Figure
Figure
Figure 14.
Figure14.
14. The
14.The
The composite
Thecomposite
composite of
compositeof beam
ofbeam
of and
beamand
beam column
andcolumn
and element.
columnelement.
column element.
element.

The
The test
The test data
data collected
collected were
were compared
compared with
with the
the calculation
calculation results
results of the hysteretic curve and
The testdata
test datacollected
collectedwere
werecompared
compared withwith
the the calculation
calculation results of of
results of the
the the hysteretic
hysteretic
hysteretic curve
curve andand
curve and
the
the
the
the skeleton
skeleton
skeleton curve
curve
curve to
to
to verify
verify
verify the
the
the model,
model,
model, refer
refer
refer to
to
to Figure
Figure
Figure 15
15
15 for
for
for comparison
comparison
comparison of
of
of hysteretic
hysteretic
hysteretic curves
curves
curves and
and
and
skeleton curve to verify the model, refer to Figure 15 for comparison of hysteretic curves and skeleton
skeleton
skeleton curves of the calculated values and the test data for FSMRL-2.
skeleton
curves ofcurves
curves of
ofthe
thecalculated
the calculated calculated
values andvalues
values and the
thetest
anddata
the test data
datafor
testFSMRL-2.
for forFSMRL-2.
FSMRL-2.

(a)
(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 15.
Figure15. Comparative
15.Comparative diagrams
Comparativediagrams for
diagramsfor hysteretic
forhysteretic and
hystereticand skeleton
andskeleton curves
skeletoncurves (calculated
curves(calculated values
(calculatedvalues and
valuesand
and testdata).
test data).
Figure 15. Comparative diagrams for hysteretic and skeleton curves (calculated values and test
test data).
data).
(a)
(a) hysteretic
(a)hysteretic curve;
hystereticcurve; (b)
curve;(b) skeleton
(b)skeleton curve.
skeletoncurve.
curve.
(a) hysteretic curve; (b) skeleton curve.

From
From Figure
From Figure 15,
15, itit
Figure 15, can
it can be
can be concluded
be concluded that
concluded that the
that the calculated
the calculated values
calculated values of
values of both
of both hysteretic
both hysteretic curves
hysteretic curves and
curves and
and
From
skeleton
skeleton Figure
curves 15,
are it can
consistent be concluded
with the that the
correspondingcalculated
data values
collected of both
from hysteretic
the test. Thecurves and
hysteretic
skeleton curves
curves are
are consistent
consistent with
with the
the corresponding
corresponding data data collected
collected from
from thethe test.
test. The
The hysteretic
hysteretic
skeleton
loops curves
tend to are consistent
expand with the
horizontally, corresponding
which indicates data collected from the test. Thedissipation.
hysteretic loops
loops
loopstend
tendto
toexpand
expandhorizontally,
horizontally,which indicatesaaafairly
whichindicates fairly good
fairlygood capacity
goodcapacity
capacityforfor energy
forenergy
energydissipation.
dissipation.DueDue
Due
to
to block
toblock and
blockand concrete
andconcrete exfoliation
concreteexfoliation
exfoliationand and the
andthe yielding
theyielding
yieldingof of the
ofthe reinforced
thereinforced steel,
reinforcedsteel, the
steel,the hysteretic
thehysteretic loops
hystereticloops starts
loopsstarts to
startsto
to
12/19
12/19
12/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 13 of 19

tend to expand horizontally, which indicates a fairly good capacity for energy dissipation. Due to
blockAppl.
andSci.concrete
2016, 6, 21
exfoliation and the yielding of the reinforced steel, the hysteretic loops starts to
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21
“pinch” in the middle in the later stages of loading, whereas sliding occurs between the upper and the
“pinch” in the middle in the later stages of loading, whereas sliding occurs between the upper and
lowerthe
layers.
lowerin The skeleton
layers. curves are consistent
The skeleton in terms of the trends, andandthe
theloading simulation was
“pinch” the middle in the curves are consistent
later stages in whereas
of loading, terms of the trends,
sliding occurs loading
between thesimulation
upper and
proven accurate from the cracking, yielding, and peaking of the damage to the
was proven accurate from the cracking, yielding, and peaking of the damage to the specimens. specimens.
the lower layers. The skeleton curves are consistent in terms of the trends, and the loading simulation
was proven accurate from the cracking, yielding, and peaking of the damage to the specimens.
4.3. Analysis of the
4.3. Analysis of Load-Bearing Performance
the Load-Bearing Performancewhen
when the StiffnessRatio
the Stiffness RatioExceeds
Exceeds
1 1
As4.3.Table
Analysis
As Table of1the
1 shows, Load-Bearing
the the
shows, height
heightPerformance
increase
increaseof when
thethe
of the
FS FS Stiffness
layer Ratioin
layerresults
results Exceeds 1
inaastiffness
stiffness decrease, indicating the
decrease, indicating
the deterioration
deterioration of the
As Table of the load-bearing
load-bearing
1 shows, the height performance
performance
increase of the of
of the the overall
overall
FS layer structure.
structure.
results In practice,
In practice,
in a stiffness because
decrease, becausea large
indicating a large
space
space the is generally
is generally
deterioration reserved
reserved for the lower layer,
for the lowerperformance
of the load-bearing the layer
layer, the layer height
of theheight tends
overalltends to be considerable.
to beInconsiderable.
structure. In
practice, becausethis
In regard,
this
a largeregard,
shearshear
wallwall
space is structures
generally
structures can
bebe
reserved
can introduced—when
for the lower layer, the
introduced—when necessary—to
layer height lower
necessary—to tends
lower thebe
to stiffness
the ratioratio
considerable.
stiffness atInthe
atinterim
this regard,
the interim
layer, which helps to improve the load-bearing performance of the structure at large. Here, theinterim
paper
layer, shear
which wall structures
helps can bethe
to improve introduced—when necessary—to
load-bearing performance oflower the stiffness
the structure ratio
at large. atHere,
the the paper
takes the FSMRL wall structures with an FS layer height of 1700 mm as the study object, both sides
takes layer, which helps
the FSMRL to improve with
wall structures the load-bearing
an FS layerperformance
height of 1700 of themmstructure
as the at large.object,
study Here, the both paper
sides of
of which
takes theare enhanced
FSMRL wall by shear walls
structures withofandifferent
FS layerwidths,
height namely
of 1700 0mm mmasfor theMX-1,
study200 mm both
object, for MX-2,
sides
which300 aremm
enhanced by shear walls of different widths, namely 0 mm for MX-1, 200 mm for MX-2,
and 300
of whichforareMX-3, 400 mm
enhanced for MX-4,
by shear walls 500 mm for widths,
of different MX-5, 600 mm 0for
namely mm MX-6, 700 mm
for MX-1, 200for
mm MX-7,
for MX-2,
mm for
800 MX-3,for400MX-8.
mm for MX-4, 500 mm for MX-5, 600 mmmm, for MX-6,shear 700 mm forapplied MX-7, and 800 mm
300 mm
mm for MX-3, With
400 mma for uniformed
MX-4, 500thickness
mm for MX-5, of 100 600 mmthe for MX-6,walls 700 mm for MX-7, for this
and
for MX-8. With
experiment—both a uniformed thickness
horizontal and of 100 mm,
vertical—use the
φ6 shear walls
reinforcement
800 mm for MX-8. With a uniformed thickness of 100 mm, the shear walls applied for this applied
with anfor this
interval experiment—both
of 100 mm
horizontal
(See and vertical—use
Figure 16). Thehorizontal
experiment—both ϕ6 reinforcement
detailed reinforcement
and vertical—useiswith
shown an
φ6 interval
Figureof 4.100
inreinforcement Themm (See
calculated
with Figure
results16).
an interval The mm
of stiffness
of 100 detailed
ratio
(See are
reinforcement summarized
Figureis 16).
shownThe ininFigure
Table reinforcement
detailed 5.4. The calculatedis shownresults of stiffness
in Figure 4. Theratio are summarized
calculated in Table 5.
results of stiffness
ratio are summarized in Table 5.

Figure 16. The study

Figure16. studymodel.
model.
Figure 16. The study model.
Table
Table 5. Stiffness
5. Stiffness ratio
ratio atatthe
theinterim
interim layer
layer (with
(withshear
shearwall
wallwidth
widthas variable).
as variable).
Table
Model 5. Stiffness ratio atMX-1
the interim
MX-2 layer (with shear
MX-3 MX-4wall width as
MX-5 variable).
MX-6 MX-7 MX-8
StiffnessModel at the interim layerMX-1
ratio Model 3.39 MX-2
3.26 MX-3
3.00 MX-4
2.62
MX-1 MX-2 MX-3 MX-4 MX-5 MX-6 MX-7 MX-5
2.19 MX-6
1.78 1.42 MX-7
1.13 MX-8
MX-8
Stiffness
Stiffness ratio atratio
the at the interim
interim layerlayer3.393.39 3.26
3.26 3.00
3.00 2.62
2.62 2.19
2.19 1.781.78 1.42 1.421.13 1.13

Figure 17. Force exerted on the FSMRL wall structures (with shear wall width as variable).
Figure 17. Force
Figure exerted
17. Force onon
exerted thethe
FSMRL
FSMRLwall
wallstructures (withshear
structures (with shearwall
wall width
width as variable).
as variable).
13/19
13/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 14 of 19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21

The simulation
The simulation of of the
the load-bearing performance is
load-bearing performance is conducted
conducted using
using OpenSees.
OpenSees. To streamline the
To streamline the
calculation process, the authors conduct monotone loading to obtain loading-displacement
calculation process, the authors conduct monotone loading to obtain loading-displacement curves, curves,
which are
which are displayed
displayed in in Figure
Figure 17.17.
Based on the force-displacement
Based on the force-displacement curves, curves, the
the relation
relation between
between thethe yield
yield loading
loading and and peak
peak loading
loading
exerted and
exerted and the
the stiffness
stiffness ratio
ratio at
at the
the interim
interim layer
layer were
were identified
identified(See
(SeeFigure
Figure18). 18).
It can be concluded from Figure 18 that the increase in the interim
It can be concluded from Figure 18 that the increase in the interim stiffness ratio stiffness ratio triggers
triggers aa decline
decline
in the yield and peak loading. When the stiffness ratio exceeds 2.5,
in the yield and peak loading. When the stiffness ratio exceeds 2.5, the decrease of thethe decrease of the peak
peak loading
loading
increases in
increases in speed,
speed,whereas
whereasthe theloading
loading exerted
exertedat the yield
at the of the
yield of specimen
the specimen drops dramatically
drops after
dramatically
the ratio exceeds 3. The paper recommends a not-less-than 2.5 interim stiffness
after the ratio exceeds 3. The paper recommends a not-less-than 2.5 interim stiffness ratio for the ratio for the FSMRL
wall structure,
FSMRL becausebecause
wall structure, the yield strength
the yield needs
strength to be
needs maintained
to be maintained at ata acertain
certain level without
level without
compromising the
compromising the overall
overall structural
structural reliability
reliability (The
(The higher
higher the
the interim
interim stiffness
stiffness ratio
ratio grows,
grows, the
the faster
faster
the frame-supported-layer stiffness decreases. In the meantime, the drop
the frame-supported-layer stiffness decreases. In the meantime, the drop of the yield loading influencesof the yield loading
influences
the overall the overallreliability).
structural structural reliability).

Figure 18. Relation between the interim stiffness ratio and load-bearing performance.
performance.

4.4. Analysis
4.4. Analysis of
of the
the Load-Bearing
Load-Bearing Performance
Performance when
when the
the Stiffness
Stiffness Ratio
Ratio Falls
Falls Below
Below 11
Due to
Due to the
the shear
shear wall
wall added
added for
for this
this experiment
experiment and and the
the hole
hole opening
opening of of aa large
large amount
amount at at the
the
upper structure
upper structure (for
(forfunctional
functionalpurposes),
purposes),the thestiffness ratio
stiffness falls
ratio below
falls 1. Therefore,
below 1. Therefore, it is itpossible that
is possible
that the upper structure may encounter premature failure caused by the extremely low stiffnessthe
the upper structure may encounter premature failure caused by the extremely low stiffness in in
lateral
the forceforce
lateral resistance. To this
resistance. end,end,
To this the paper
the paperadjusts the location
adjusts and the
the location anddimensions
the dimensions of theofhole
the
opening
hole in aninattempt
opening to obtain
an attempt a host
to obtain a host of of
stiffness
stiffnessratios
ratiosbelow
below1.1. The
The simulation
simulation is performed
is performed
using OpenSees, which provides the variation pattern for the influence of the
using OpenSees, which provides the variation pattern for the influence of the stiffness ratio on stiffness ratio on the
the
overall structure.
overall structure.
The FSMRL wall structures with 100 mm thick and 800 mm wide shear walls at both sides (whose
reinforcement is displayed in Figure 16) use a 1700 mm FS layer height, and the upper structure
varies in MX-9 to MX-16 from a frame with no blocks embedded to MRL walls of different widths
(see Figure 19 and Table 6). The detailed reinforcement and dimensions for the opening are shown in
Figure 4. The interim stiffness ratios for the different structural layouts are calculated, and the results
are listed in Table 7.

Table 6. FSMRL wall structure with different hole opening.

Model Number
MX-9 MX-10 MX-11 MX-12 MX-13 MX-14 MX-15 MX-16
The Opening Rate
Slab 1 (a) 1 2/3 2/3 2/3 (b)
1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3
Slab 2 1 1 2/3 2/3 2/3 1/3 1/3 1/3
Figure 19. Partial
Slab 3FSMRL wall structure 1with different
1 hole
1 opening.
3/4 (a) MX-9
3/4 (a frame
3/4 with1/2
no blocks
1/4
at the upper structure) (b) MX-16 (blocks embedded to slab 1, 2, and 3 with different opening rates at
the upper structure).

14/19
upper structure (for functional purposes), the stiffness ratio falls below 1. Therefore, it is possible that
the upper structure may encounter premature failure caused by the extremely low stiffness in the
lateral force resistance. To this end, the paper adjusts the location and the dimensions of the hole
opening in an attempt to obtain a host of stiffness ratios below 1. The simulation is performed
using OpenSees, which provides the variation pattern for the influence of the stiffness ratio on
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21
the
15 of 19
overall structure.

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21

The FSMRL wall structures with 100 mm thick and 800 mm wide shear walls at both sides
The FSMRL wall structures with 100 mm thick and 800 mm wide shear walls at both sides
(whose reinforcement is displayed in Figure 16) use a 1700 mm FS layer height, and the upper
(whose reinforcement is displayed in Figure 16) use a 1700 mm FS layer height, and the upper
structure varies in MX-9 to MX-16 from a frame with no blocks embedded to MRL walls of different
structure varies in MX-9 to MX-16 from a frame with no blocks embedded to MRL walls of different
widths (see Figure 19 and Table 6). The detailed reinforcement and dimensions for the opening are
widths (see Figure 19 and Table 6). The detailed reinforcement and dimensions for the opening are
shown in Figure 4. The interim stiffness ratios for the different structural layouts are calculated, and
shown in Figure 4. The interim stiffness ratios for the different structural layouts are calculated, and
the results are listed in Table 7.
the results are listed in Table 7.
Table 6. FSMRL wall structure with different hole opening.
Table
(a)6. FSMRL wall structure with different hole opening.
(b)
Model Number
Model Number MX-9 MX-10 MX-11 MX-12 MX-13 MX-14 MX-15 MX-16
Figure
Figure 19. Partial
The Partial
19. FSMRL
OpeningFSMRL
Rate
wall
wall structure
structure
MX-9 with
MX-10different
with MX-11 hole
different hole opening.
opening.
MX-12 MX-13(a)
(a) MX-9
MX-14(a
MX-9 (a frame
MX-15 with
frame with no
no blocks
MX-16 blocks
at The Opening Rate
at the
the upper
upper structure)
Slab 1
structure) (b)
(b) MX-16
MX-16 (blocks
1(blocks embedded
2/3
embedded 2/3 to
to slab
2/31,
slab 1, 2,
2, and
1/3 33 with
and different
1/3
with 1/3 opening
different 1/3 rates
opening rates at
at
Slab
Slab 12 11 2/3
1 2/3
2/3 2/3
2/3 1/3
2/3 1/3
1/3 1/3
1/3 1/3
1/3
the upper structure).
the upper structure).
Slab 2 1 1 2/3 2/3 2/3 1/3 1/3 1/3
Slab 3 1 1 1 3/4 3/4 3/4 1/2 1/4
Slab 3 1 1 1 3/4 3/4 3/4 1/2 1/4

Table 7. Stiffness
Table 7. Stiffness ratio
ratio at
at the 14/19 layer
the interim
interim layer (with
(with hole
hole as
as variable).
variable).
Table 7. Stiffness ratio at the interim layer (with hole as variable).
ModelModel
Number Number MX-9 MX-10 MX-11 MX-11 MX-12 MX-13 MX-14 MX-15 MX-16
Model Number MX-9 MX-9 MX-10
MX-10 MX-11 MX-12 MX-12 MX-13MX-13 MX-14 MX-14 MX-15 MX-15MX-16MX-16
Interim stiffness ratio 0. 11 0. 21 0. 32 0. 42 0. 52 0. 62 0. 72 0. 82
Interim stiffness
Interim ratioratio 0.110. 11 0.21
stiffness 0. 21 0.32
0. 32 0.0.42
42 0. 0.52
52 0.62 0. 720.72 0. 82 0.82
0. 62

Figure 20 depicts the load-bearing performances of the specimens.

Figure
Figure 20 depicts the
20 depicts the load-bearing
load-bearing performances
performances of
of the
the specimens.
specimens.

Figure 20. Force exerted on the FSMRL wall structures (with hole as variable).
Force exerted
Figure 20. Force exerted on the FSMRL wall structures (with hole as variable).

Based on the force-displacement curves listed above, the relation between the yield and peak
Based on the force-displacement curves listed
listed above, the relation between the yield
yield and
and peak
loading andon
Based the
the force-displacement
interim curves
stiffness ratio are identified above,
for eachthe relation(see
specimen between
Figurethe
21). peak
loading and the interim stiffness ratio are identified for each specimen (see Figure 21).
loading and the interim stiffness ratio are identified for each specimen (see Figure 21).

Figure 21. Relation between interim stiffness ratio and load bearing performance.
Figure 21. Relation between interim stiffness ratio and load bearing performance.
Figure 21. Relation between interim stiffness ratio and load bearing performance.

Figure 21 shows that when the stiffness ratio falls below 0.4, the yield and peak loading limit
Figure 21 shows that when the stiffness ratio falls below 0.4, the yield and peak loading limit
drop at an alarming rate due to the MRL wall’s relatively low stiffness level in lateral force resistance.
drop at an alarming rate due to the MRL wall’s relatively low stiffness level in lateral force resistance.

15/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 16 of 19

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21

Figure 21 shows that when the stiffness ratio falls below 0.4, the yield and peak loading limit drop
at an alarming rate
The premature dueundermines
failure to the MRL wall’s relatively
the overall lowcapacity;
bearing stiffness level in lateral
therefore, force resistance.
an interim The
stiffness ratio
premature failure
of at least 0.4 mustundermines the for
be guaranteed overall bearing capacity; therefore, an interim stiffness ratio of at
the structure.
least 0.4 must be guaranteed for the structure.
4.5. Suggested Numerical Range for the Interim Stiffness Ratio in the Engineering Design Stage
4.5. Suggested Numerical Range for the Interim Stiffness Ratio in the Engineering Design Stage
This paper integrates the findings of Figure 18 and Figure 21 on the influence of the interim
This paper integrates the findings of Figures 18 and 21 on the influence of the interim stiffness
stiffness ratio on the specimen’s load-bearing performance, and presents Figure 22 as a
ratio on the specimen’s load-bearing performance, and presents Figure 22 as a conclusive summary.
conclusive summary.

Figure 22.
Figure 22. Relation between
between interim
interim stiffness
stiffness ratio
ratio and
and load
load bearing
bearing performance.
performance.

The following
The following can
can be
be concluded
concluded from
fromFigure
Figure22:
22:
(1) When the stiffness ratio is approximately 1, the yield and peak loading reach a maximum, which
(1) When the stiffness ratio is approximately 1, the yield and peak loading reach a maximum, which
can be interpreted as fairly good load-bearing performance with even distribution of stiffness
can be interpreted as fairly good load-bearing performance with even distribution of stiffness
between the upper and the lower structure.
between the upper and the lower structure.
(2) Based on the variation pattern of the yield and peak loading, the paper takes into consideration
(2) Based on the variation pattern of the yield and peak loading, the paper takes into consideration
the seismic performance required and identifies the numerical range for the interim stiffness
the seismic performance required and identifies the numerical range for the interim stiffness
ratio, which falls between 0.4 and 2.5. The maximum displacements for MX-12, MX-13, MX-14,
ratio, which falls between 0.4 and 2.5. The maximum displacements for MX-12, MX-13, MX-14,
MX-15, and MX-16 are 1/300, 1/433, 1/555, 1/820, and 1/900, respectively, but the inter-layer
MX-15, and MX-16 are 1/300, 1/433, 1/555, 1/820, and 1/900, respectively, but the inter-layer
displacement angle does not exceed 1/800. On this basis, the paper suggests a numerical range
displacement angle does not exceed 1/800. On this basis, the paper suggests a numerical range
of 0.7 to 2.5 for engineering design.
of 0.7 to 2.5 for engineering design.
5. Summary
5. Summary andand Conclusions
Conclusions
The paper
The paper studied
studied thethe influence
influenceofofthe
theinterim
interimstiffness
stiffnessratio
ratioon
onthe
theload-bearing
load-bearing performance
performance of
the FSMRL wall structure and presented evenly-distributed figures by adding
of the FSMRL wall structure and presented evenly-distributed figures by adding shear walls withshear walls with
differentwidths
different widthstotothethe
FS FS
layerlayer orusing
or by by using various
various hole opening
hole opening approaches;
approaches; the load-bearing
the load-bearing process
is then simulated using OpenSees software, which provides relationship curves for thecurves
process is then simulated using OpenSees software, which provides relationship forratio
stiffness the
stiffness ratio and the yield
and the yield and/or peak loading.and/or peak loading.
(1) The paper recommends a not-less-than 2.5 interim stiffness ratio for the FSMRL wall structure,
(1) The paper recommends a not-less-than 2.5 interim stiffness ratio for the FSMRL wall structure,
because the yield strength needs to be maintained at a certain level without compromising the
because the yield strength needs to be maintained at a certain level without compromising the
overall structural reliability. At the same time, an interim stiffness ratio of at least 0.4 must be
overall structural reliability. At the same time, an interim stiffness ratio of at least 0.4 must be
guaranteed for the structure, because if the stiffness ratio falls below 0.4, the yield and peak
guaranteed for the structure, because if the stiffness ratio falls below 0.4, the yield and peak
loading limit drop at an alarming rate.
loading limit drop at an alarming rate.
(2) The increase of hole opening ratio—the area of the hole to the area of the slab—brings up the
(2) The increase of hole opening ratio—the area of the hole to the area of the slab—brings up the
maximum displacement angle, based on the limit of the inter-layer displacement angle,
maximum displacement angle, based on the limit of the inter-layer displacement angle, which
which does not exceed 1/800, the range is adjusted to 0.7 to 2.5 for reasonable engineering design
does not exceed 1/800, the range is adjusted to 0.7 to 2.5 for reasonable engineering design
in practice.
in practice.
Notation
γe: equivalent stiffness ratio at the interim layer
H1: height of the interim layer (frame-supported layer)

16/19
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 17 of 19

Notation
γe : equivalent stiffness ratio at the interim layer
H1 : height of the interim layer (frame-supported layer)
∆1 : elative displacement at the interim layer
H2 : eight of the upper storey (MRL wall layer)
∆2 : relative displacement of the upper storey
H: wall height; Ieq : inertia moment of equivalent wall section
H: height of wall section; Ae : area of equivalent wall section
beq : width of equivalent wall section; Gc : shear modulus for concrete
µ N : axial compressive ratio (when µ N falls below 0.3, µ N is 0.3; likewise if µ N exceeds 0.6, then µ N is 0.6)
Ac : sum of the cross-section area of concrete used for ribbed columns, connected columns and edge members
(flange concrete excluded)
Aq : sum of the cross-section area for embedded blocks
µ: non-uniform coefficient for the shear stress distribution at the cross-section (for a rectangle cross-section,
µ = 1.2)
ηc : coefficient that reflects the restraint of the ribbed beams and the ribbed columns on the embedded blocks,
which can be set to 1.05 (or ηc = 1.05)
Ec : elastic modulus of concrete; Eq : elastic modulus of embedded block
αc : modified coefficient for the lateral-resistant stiffness; ic : frame stiffness or the stiffness of seismic wall
$fpc: concrete compressive strength at 28 days (compression is negative)
$epsc0: concrete strain at maximum strength
$fpcu: concrete crushing strength
$epsU: concrete strain at crushing strength
$λ: ratio between unloading slope at $epsU and initial slope (The initial slope for this model is
2 ˆ $fpc/$epsc0)
$s1p $e1p: stress and strain (or force & deformation) at first point of the envelope in the positive direction
$s2p $e2p: stress and strain (or force & deformation) at second point of the envelope in the positive direction
$s3p $e3p: stress and strain (or force & deformation) at third point of the envelope in the positive
direction (optional)
$s1n $e1n: stress and strain (or force & deformation) at first point of the envelope in the negative direction
$s2n $e2n: stress and strain (or force & deformation) at second point of the envelope in the negative direction
$s3n $e3n: stress and strain (or force & deformation) at third point of the envelope in the negative
direction (optional)
K0 : initial elastic stiffness
µ: exponent of non-linear hardening component
$β: power used to determine the degraded unloading stiffness based on ductility, µ´$β (optional,
default = 0.0)
In cases $s3p > $s2p and abs ($s3n) > abs ($s2n), the envelope of the hysteretic material after $e3p or $e3n
follows the slope defined by the 2nd and 3rd points of the envelope.
In cases $s3p <= $s2p and abs ($s3n) <= abs($s2n), the envelope of the hysteretic material after $e3p or $e3n is
a flat line with a constant stress (or force) equal to $s3p or $s3n
Acknowledgments: This research was conducted with the financial support of the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (NO. 51508009) and the Project was supported by the Beijing Postdoctoral Research
Foundation (2015ZZ-29). National Science and technology support program of China (NO. 2015BAL03B01).
Author Contributions: Suizi Jia performed the experiments, analyzed the data, and wrote the manuscript;
Suizi Jia, Wanlin Cao and Quan Yuan designed the experiments; Suizi Jia and Yuchen Zhang modified the
final paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Wang, T.; Lei, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Kong, Z. Seismic damage analysis of school buildings in Lushan earthquake.
J. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 2013, 33, 36–47.
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 18 of 19

2. Wang, Y.R.; Feng, X.G.; Fu, B. The influence of pier stiffness ratio on the failure modes of masonry structures.
Shork Vib. 2015, 2015, 1–15. [CrossRef]
3. Ghorbanie-Asl, M. Performance-Based Seismic Design of Building Structures. Ph.D. Thesis, Carleton
University, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2007.
4. Liang, X.W.; Li, B.; Li, X.W. Lateral load-carrying capacity of continuous masonry wall supported on RC
frame. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2009, 10, 305–317. [CrossRef]
5. Polyakow, S.V. Design of Earthquake Resistant Structure; Mir Publishers: Moscow, Germany, 1985.
6. Paula, T.; Prieystley, M.J.N. Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings; John Wiley and Sons,
Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1992.
7. Narendra, T. Design of Reinforced Masonroy Structure; McGraw-Hill. Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2010.
8. Li, X.J.; Zhou, Z.H.; Yu, H.Y. Strong motion observations and recordings from the great Wenchuan Earthquake.
Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 2008, 7, 235–246. [CrossRef]
9. Gao, X.W.; Xiao, W.; Wang, J. The anlysis method of lateral stiffness for the first and second storey of masonry
building with two stories frame and wall at the bottom. Build. Struct. 1999, 11, 9–11. (In Chinese)
10. Zhao, B.; Fabio, T.; Tiziana, R. Field investigation on the performance of building structures during the
12 May 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China. Eng. Struct. 2009, 31, 1707–1732. [CrossRef]
11. Kaushik, H.B.; Rai, D.C.; Jain, S.K. Effectiveness of some strengthening options for masonry-infilled RC
frames with open first story. J. Struct. Eng. 2009, 135, 925–937. [CrossRef]
12. Mohammadi, M.; Nikfar, F. Strength and stiffness of masonry-infilled frames with central openings based on
experimental results. J. Struct. Eng. 2013, 139, 974–984. [CrossRef]
13. Wang, Z.J.; Liu, W.Q.; Wang, J.; Jing, Y.S.; Xu, C. Shaking table test for a mid-highrise big-bay RC frame
model with special-shaped columns. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 1999, 19, 59–64.
14. Ahmad, R. Lateral stiffness of concrete shear walls for tall buildings. Struct. J. 2011, 108, 755–765.
15. Burton, H.; Deierlein, G. Simulation of seismic collapse in nonductile reinforced concrete frame buildings
with masonry infills. J. Struct. Eng. 2014, 140. [CrossRef]
16. Mazzoni, S.; Mckenna, F.; Scott, M.H. OpenSees Users Manual; University of California: Berkeley, CA,
USA, 2006.
17. Liu, P.; Guo, M. An experimental study of multi-grid composite walls. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2012, 15, 495–507.
[CrossRef]
18. Sun, J.; Xiong, Y.Q.; Chang, P. Damage analysis of multi-ribbed wall structures under monotonic lateral
loads. Eng. Struct. 2015, 89, 37–48. [CrossRef]
19. Liu, P.; Yao, Q.F. Dynamic reliability of structures: The example of multi-grid composite walls.
Struct. Eng. Mech. 2010, 36, 463–479. [CrossRef]
20. Sun, J.; Jia, Y.J.; Mo, Y.L. Evaluation of elastic properties and lateral stiffness of multi-ribbed walls based on
equivalent elastic model. Eng. Struct. 2014, 72, 92–101. [CrossRef]
21. Zhang, Y.; Zhang, C.Y.; Zhang, Q.; Zhang, D.F. The interaction analysis of the middle-high multi-ribbed
composite wall-shear wall structures and pile-raft foundation. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2012, 170, 434–438.
[CrossRef]
22. Li, S.C.; Dong, J.X.; Li, L.F. Experimental hysteretic behavior of in-plane loaded reinforced grouted
multi-ribbed aerated concrete blocks masonry walls. Struct. Eng. Mech. 2012, 41, 95–112. [CrossRef]
23. Chang, P.; Sun, J. Finite element model and numerical simulation of multi-ribbed slab structure. Int. J. Adv.
Comput. Technol. 2012, 4, 385–394.
24. Jia, S.Z.; Cao, W.L.; Yuan, Q. An experimental study of frame-supported multi-ribbed composite walls.
Adv. Struct. Eng. 2015, 18, 497–511. [CrossRef]
25. Jia, S.Z.; Cao, W.L.; Yuan, Q.; Zhang, Y.C. Experimental study on frame-supported multi-ribbed composite
walls under low-reversed cyclic loading. Eur. J. Environ. Civil Eng. 2015, 6, 1–18.
26. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. JGJ3-2010.
In Technical Specification for Concrete Structure of Tall Building; China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing,
China, 2011. (In Chinese)
27. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. JGJ/T275-2013.
In Directive Rules for Ribbed-Grid Composite Wall Structure; China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing,
China, 2014. (In Chinese)
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 21 19 of 19

28. Zhu, M.; Scott, M.H. Modeling fluid-structure interaction by the particle finite element method in OpenSees.
Comput. Struct. 2014, 132, 12–21. [CrossRef]
29. Lu, X.Z.; Jiang, J.J.; Teng, J.G.; Ye, L.P. Finite element simulation of debonding in FRP-to-concrete bonded
joints. Constr. Build. Mater. 2006, 20, 412–424. [CrossRef]
30. Lu, X.Z.; Teng, J.G.; Ye, L.P.; Jiang, J.J. Bond-slip models for FRP sheets/plates externally bonded to concrete.
Eng. Struct. 2005, 27, 920–937. [CrossRef]

© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution
(CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).