Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
RC STRUCTURAL WALLS
Known as shear walls
Designed to resist lateral forces
Excellent structural system to resist
earthquake
Provided throughout the entire height of wall
Practicing from 1960s for medium and high
rise
PLACEMENT OF SHEAR
WALLS
Y
X
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Thickness 150 400 mm
Minimum reinforcement 0.25% of gross area in
each direction
Diameter shall not exceed 1/10 th thickness of
section
Reinforcement provided in two curtains when:
0.25 f ck
Factored shear stress exceeds
or
Vu
v
tw d w
Thickness of wall
section
Factored shear
force
Effective depth of
wall section
0.8lw =
for rectangular
sections
10
456:2000
If
If
CONTD
from table 19 of IS
<
>
shear reinforcement is
v c
v c
Vus
11
Vus
CONTD
Area of horizontal
shear reinforcement
0.87 f y Ah d w
Sv
Vertical
f y = characteristic strength of spacing
steel
d
w
12
FLEXURAL STRENGTH
For
xu xu
lw lw
M uv
xu
1
1 0.416
2
f ck twlw
2
lw
where,
xu
lw 2 0.36
0.87 f y
f ck
Pu
f ck twlw
xu
2
0.168
3
lw
xu
lw
0.0035
0.87 f y
0.0035
Es
0.87 f y
0.0035 Es
Ast
t wlw
13
FLEXURAL STRENGTH
xu xu
1
For
lw lw
1
3
6 xu / lw
2
xu
xu
M uv
1 2
2
f ck t wlw
lw
lw
1
0.36 1
2 2
CONTD
3
2
2 1
0.15 1
2
2 3
BOUNDARY ELEMENTS
Portions along edges of shear wall strengthened
by longitudinal and transverse reinforcement
Can have same or greater thickness compared to
wall
Develop good flexural strength
Should have adequate axial load carrying capacity
Vertical reinforcement range between 0.8 and 6%
16
SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR
CONTD
Ductility
Ratio of displacement at maximum load to
that at yield
Highly desirable property for shear walls
Stiffness
Property of element to resist displacement
More stiffer wall need more force to deflect it
16
SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR
CONTD
EI
3.5 c 4w
mhw
19
SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR
CONTD
SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR
CONTD
CASE STUDY 1
22
lw
hw
Fig. 3 A shear
wall
hw
Aspect ratio
lw
=
1 Squat
1 2 Intermediate
2 Slender
24
TESTING METHODOLOGY
TESTING METHODOLOGY
CONTD
TESTING METHODOLOGY
CONTD
28
OBSERVATIONS
W1 exhibited flexural
ductile failure
Cracks developed at
early stage
Propagated inwards
to the core of the
section
OBSERVATIONS
CONTD
30
SUMMARY
31
SUMMARY
High ALR affect failure
High ALR has a suppressive effect on ductility
As ALR increases energy dissipation decreases
Axial stiffness reduces with increasing lateral
deformation
Leads to reduction in applied axial load
With high ALR faster and greater reduction
31
CASE STUDY 2
34
Staggered openings
36
Staggered openings
36
TESTING METHODOLOGY
37
TESTING METHODOLOGY
CONTD
OBSERVATIONS
Initial
cracking
Plasticized
concrete
Crushed
concrete
P (kN)
P (kN)
P (kN)
W1
29.33
113.63
114.43
W2
25.12
100.12
103.72
W3
25.13
88.63
92.03
W4
25.15
88.40
95.90
W5
17.7
69.70
73.80
Model
39
SUMMARY
Walls with staggered openings were more
rigid
With same amount of reinforcement ductile
failure observed for staggered opening walls
and brittle failure for regular opening walls
Staggered opening walls failed at higher
seismic forces and horizontal displacements
40
CONCLUSIONS
Shear walls are efficient in resisting earthquakes
More efficient with increased ductility
Soil structure interaction studies are important
ALR ratio has adverse influence on seismic
REFERENCES
1. Anna Birely and Dawn Lehman (2008).
Investigation of the seismic behavior and
analysis of reinforced concrete structural
walls. The 14th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.
2. Lepage, A (1994). Seismic Drift Estimates
for RC Structures. Eleventh World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Acapulco, Mexico.
42
REFERENCES
CONTD
REFERENCES
CONTD
REFERENCES
CONTD
THANK YOU