CONCRETE SHEAR WALL & BUILDING FRAME
CONCRETE SHEAR WALL & BUILDING FRAME
(OP)
I have asked this question several weeks ago on irregular building. I got some valuables inputs but were not able to put them into my design analysis as I still have no way to go further due to lack of confidence.
I am designing an L-shaped building that has to resist earthquake forces.
My 1st try, assumed column sizes are the same ; 450mm x 450mm, I computed the base shear and the resulting horizontal earthquake forces to be applied on the frames seem too large. Obviously the results are so largely due to large eccentricity where torsional moment contributed much to the hor forces on the frame. The top floor takes resulting hor force about 100+ KN and decreases as it goes down the floor.
I have just gone through some reference which seem to direct me to using reinforced concrete shear wall as a better option rather than building separation.
2nd try, I subjectively combined shearwall and columns in the calculations of stiffness and deflection and finally the hor. forces on the portal frames. The hor. forces on the column-beam frame seem to very small (35KN max) compared to my 1st try while the shear wall takes larger forces (230KN at the top. The resulting hor forces, in my view, are attracted more by the shear wall because of its higher stiffness.
Is my 2nd try correct when we use shear wall to account for earthquake forces along with column-beam frames or the forces should simply be distributed on the shear wall and assume no hor forces applied to the column-beam frames (Consequently column-beam frames are assumed to be non-Structural resisting frames)?
I am designing an L-shaped building that has to resist earthquake forces.
My 1st try, assumed column sizes are the same ; 450mm x 450mm, I computed the base shear and the resulting horizontal earthquake forces to be applied on the frames seem too large. Obviously the results are so largely due to large eccentricity where torsional moment contributed much to the hor forces on the frame. The top floor takes resulting hor force about 100+ KN and decreases as it goes down the floor.
I have just gone through some reference which seem to direct me to using reinforced concrete shear wall as a better option rather than building separation.
2nd try, I subjectively combined shearwall and columns in the calculations of stiffness and deflection and finally the hor. forces on the portal frames. The hor. forces on the column-beam frame seem to very small (35KN max) compared to my 1st try while the shear wall takes larger forces (230KN at the top. The resulting hor forces, in my view, are attracted more by the shear wall because of its higher stiffness.
Is my 2nd try correct when we use shear wall to account for earthquake forces along with column-beam frames or the forces should simply be distributed on the shear wall and assume no hor forces applied to the column-beam frames (Consequently column-beam frames are assumed to be non-Structural resisting frames)?






RE: CONCRETE SHEAR WALL & BUILDING FRAME
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: CONCRETE SHEAR WALL & BUILDING FRAME
"It is imperative Cunth doesn't get his hands on those codes."
RE: CONCRETE SHEAR WALL & BUILDING FRAME
I tried to neglect the column-beam frames participation but resulting lateral forces on the shear walls seem large.
Appreciate your additional advice Mr. MacGruber22. Could you please give the specific version of ACI? I am not in US but I studied in the Philippines which has structural codes patterned mostly from ACI/ASCE/SAE and little on others.