M@hdi42
7th October 2013, 01:59 PM
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SEISMIC DESIGN OF HYBRID COUPLED WALLS
http://forum.civilea.com/showthread.php?tid=21246
Author: AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS | Size: 1.11 MB | Format: PDF | Publisher: AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS | Year: unknown | pages: 113 | ISBN: unknown
http://pic.civilea.com/images/45690604123139946041.jpg
بند انگشتی, برای دیدن عکس به صورت کامل بر روی آن کلیک نمایید
Reinforced concrete (RC) coupled wall systems, where RC beams couple two or more RC walls
in series are frequently used in medium and high-rise construction. The benefits of coupling in
such systems are well recognized and understood. The coupling beams provide transfer of
vertical forces between adjacent walls, which creates a frame-like coupling action that resists a
portion of the total overturning moment induced by the seismic action. This coupling action has
three major beneficial effects. First, it reduces the moments that must be resisted by the
individual wall piers resulting in a more efficient structural system. Secondly, it provides a
means by which seismic energy is dissipated over the entire height of the wall system as the
coupling beams undergo inelastic deformations. A final important advantage of a coupled wall
system is that it has a lateral stiffness that is significantly greater than the sum of its component
wall piers permitting a reduced footprint for the lateral load resisting system.
The structural response of coupled walls is, however, complicated by the fact that the system is
comprised of components that exhibit significantly different ductility demands. Figure 1 shows
the idealized lateral force-deformation response of a coupled wall structure as the sum of the
individual cantilever pier flexural responses and the frame-like response of the coupling action
provided by the beams. In contrast to the walls, the coupling beams must undergo significant
inelastic deformations in order to allow the structure to achieve its lateral yield strength, RT. As
the system continues to deform laterally in a ductile manner, the wall ductility ratio, defined as
the ratio of the ultimate deformation to that at yield, is significantly smaller than that of the
beams. If the beams are unable to cope with the high ductility demands imposed upon them, the
coupling action deteriorates leading to a drop in the lateral resistance and a dramatic change in
the dynamic properties as the system eventually degenerates into two (or multiple) independent,
uncoupled wall piers.
The shear force and deformation demands expected on coupling beams during a design-level
seismic event, coupled with their low span-to-depth ratio and the degradation of shear resisting
mechanisms attributed to concrete under load reversals, have led designers to provide special
diagonal reinforcement detailing for and in the vicinity of RC coupling beams (ACI 2005). This
special reinforcement complicates erection, potentially increasing both construction time and
cost. Furthermore, the limited shear capacity of RC coupling beams often requires designers to
provide impractically deep members (Harries et al. 2005). To mitigate these problems, some
engineers have turned to structural steel coupling beams as an alternative to reinforced concrete
beams. The resulting structural system is referred to as a hybrid coupled wall (HCW) system and
is the subject of this report.
http://www.4shared.com/file/6fcH387g/RECOMMENDATIONS_FOR_SEISMIC_DE.html
http://forum.civilea.com/showthread.php?tid=21246
Author: AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS | Size: 1.11 MB | Format: PDF | Publisher: AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS | Year: unknown | pages: 113 | ISBN: unknown
http://pic.civilea.com/images/45690604123139946041.jpg
بند انگشتی, برای دیدن عکس به صورت کامل بر روی آن کلیک نمایید
Reinforced concrete (RC) coupled wall systems, where RC beams couple two or more RC walls
in series are frequently used in medium and high-rise construction. The benefits of coupling in
such systems are well recognized and understood. The coupling beams provide transfer of
vertical forces between adjacent walls, which creates a frame-like coupling action that resists a
portion of the total overturning moment induced by the seismic action. This coupling action has
three major beneficial effects. First, it reduces the moments that must be resisted by the
individual wall piers resulting in a more efficient structural system. Secondly, it provides a
means by which seismic energy is dissipated over the entire height of the wall system as the
coupling beams undergo inelastic deformations. A final important advantage of a coupled wall
system is that it has a lateral stiffness that is significantly greater than the sum of its component
wall piers permitting a reduced footprint for the lateral load resisting system.
The structural response of coupled walls is, however, complicated by the fact that the system is
comprised of components that exhibit significantly different ductility demands. Figure 1 shows
the idealized lateral force-deformation response of a coupled wall structure as the sum of the
individual cantilever pier flexural responses and the frame-like response of the coupling action
provided by the beams. In contrast to the walls, the coupling beams must undergo significant
inelastic deformations in order to allow the structure to achieve its lateral yield strength, RT. As
the system continues to deform laterally in a ductile manner, the wall ductility ratio, defined as
the ratio of the ultimate deformation to that at yield, is significantly smaller than that of the
beams. If the beams are unable to cope with the high ductility demands imposed upon them, the
coupling action deteriorates leading to a drop in the lateral resistance and a dramatic change in
the dynamic properties as the system eventually degenerates into two (or multiple) independent,
uncoupled wall piers.
The shear force and deformation demands expected on coupling beams during a design-level
seismic event, coupled with their low span-to-depth ratio and the degradation of shear resisting
mechanisms attributed to concrete under load reversals, have led designers to provide special
diagonal reinforcement detailing for and in the vicinity of RC coupling beams (ACI 2005). This
special reinforcement complicates erection, potentially increasing both construction time and
cost. Furthermore, the limited shear capacity of RC coupling beams often requires designers to
provide impractically deep members (Harries et al. 2005). To mitigate these problems, some
engineers have turned to structural steel coupling beams as an alternative to reinforced concrete
beams. The resulting structural system is referred to as a hybrid coupled wall (HCW) system and
is the subject of this report.
http://www.4shared.com/file/6fcH387g/RECOMMENDATIONS_FOR_SEISMIC_DE.html