001 Srs 457

~/V
I~9A
UILU-ENG-78-2025
.J.f57
e. ~ CIVIL
ENGINEERING STUDIES
STRUCTURAL
RES~ARCH
SERIES NO. 457
Metz Reference Room

Civil Engineering Department
BI06 C. E. Building
University of Illinois
Urbana, Illinois 61801
ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE

FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES FOR
STRONG MOTION EARTHQUAKES
By
KATSUHIKO EMORI
and
WILLIAM C. SCHNOBRICH
A Report on a Research Project

Sponsored by
THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Research Grant ENV 74-22962
Mstz Reference Room

C;:t Yi~i E'.~lgin8 ~<:. 1.:1g 1},-')~)a!tJ!~!~:. ~
31 {):s C ..E. Buil(LL-:g
Univsrsity of Illinois
Ul"b~11l1no1e
6l8Ql
v'<;~ .',
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
at URBANA-CHAMPAIGN
URBANA, ILLINOIS
DECEMBER 1978
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1. Report No.
3. Recipient's Accession No.
UILU-ENG 78-2025
5. Report Date
4. Title and Subtitle
7. Author(s)
Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Frame-Wall

Structures for Strong Motion Earthquakes
6.
Katsuhiko Emori and William C. Schnobrich
8. Performing Or~anization Rept.

No. SRS 45/
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
December, 1978
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Urbana, Illinois 61801
11. Contract/Grant No.
ENV 7422962
13. Type of Report & Period
Covered
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
National Science Foundation

Washington, D.C. 20013
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstracts
The nonlinear response and failure mechanism of reinforced concrete

frame-wall systems are investigated through mechanical models for both
dynamic loads and static loads.
Three mechanical models: a concentrated spring model, a multiple
spring model, and a layered model, which take into account inelastic
behavior of a reinforced concrete cantilever beam, are presented. Ten
story reinforced concrete frame-wall structures are investigated. The
stiffness characteristics of each constituent member are determined
through one of the mechanical models by its inelastic properties or by
a hysteresis model. The procedure of a load increment analysis is used
for a static loading case. The equations of motion are solved by a
step by step integration procedure for a dynamic loading case. Computed
results are compared with experimental results.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis.
170. Descriptors
Nonlinear dynamic analysis, Earthquake engineering, Hysteresis loops,

Equations of motion, Reinforced Concrete, Rigid Frames
~.-
17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
17c. COSATI Field/Group

18. Availability Statement
Release Unlimited
FORM NTI5-3!5 (REV.
1073)
ENDORSED BY ANSI AND UNESCO.
19 . Security Class (This

Report)
UNCIASSIFIED
20. Security Class (This
Page
UNCLASSIFIED
THIS FORM MAY BE REPRODUCED
21. -No. of Pages
209
22. Price
USCOMM- DC 8265 P 74
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The writers would like to express their special gratitude to
Professor Mete A. Sozen of the University of Illinois for his invaluable
comments and help.
Deep appreciation is also due Dr. T. Takayanagi and Mr. D. A. Abrams,
former and current research assistants at the University of Illinois for
providing the authors with information from their analytical and experimental studies.
The numerical calculations were performed on the CYBER 175 System
of the Computing Services Office of the University of Illinois.
The
work was supported by U. S. National Science Foundation Grant No. ENV 7422962.
The support is gratefully acknowledged.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
1.2
1.3
STRUCTURAL SYSTEM AND MECHANICAL MODELS ------------------------ 8

2.1
2.2
2.3
Structural System ----------------------------------------- 8

An Analytical .Model for Frame-Wall Structures ------------- 8
Mechanical Models for Structural Components --------------- 9
FORCE-DEFORMATION RELATIONSHIPS FOR CANTILEVER BEAM MODELS ----- 13

3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
Introductory Remarks -------------------------------------- 1

Review of Previous Research ------------------------------- 2
Object and Scope ------------------------------------------ 5

Concentrated Spring Model and Multiple Spring Model ------- 14
Layered Model ---------------------------------------------22
Additional Considerations for Each Model ------------------ 26
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE ------------------------------------------- 31

Basic Assumptions ----------------------------------------- 32
Analytical Models ----------------------------------------- 32
Structural Stiffness Matrix ------------------------------- 42
Static Analysis -------------------------------------------45
4.6 Dynamic Analysis ------------------------------------------46
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
HYSTERESIS RULES AND NUMERICAL EXAMPLES ------------------------54

5.1 Introductory Remarks - _____________________________________ 54
5.2 Degrading Trilinear Hysteresis Rule -----------------------54
5.3 Comparison of Computed Hysteresis Loop with
Experimental Results --------------------------------------58
5.4 Effect of Axial Load --------------------------------------59
6.
COMPUTED RESULTS
-----------------------------------------------61
Introductory Remarks --------------------------------------61

Static Analysis -------------------------------------------62
6.3 Dynamic Analysis ------------------------------------------66
6.4 Effect of Changing Axial Load at the Base of
the Exterior Columns --------------------------------------73
6.1
6.2
Page
7
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ---------------------------------------- 78

7.1
Summary --------------------------------------------------- 78
7.2 Conclusions ----------------------------------------------- 79
7.3 Recommendations for Further Studies ----------------------- 80

LIST OF REFERENCES ---------------------------------------------------- 82
APPENDIX
A DETAILS OF STIFFNESS MATRICES _________________________________
~90
COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR NONLINEAR RESPONSE ANALYSIS

OF REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES -------------------199
NOTATION
------------------------------------------------------203
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
2.1
REINFORCING SCHEDULES FOR THE STRUCTURES OF FW-l AND FW-2 ------ 86
5.1
ASSUMED CHARACTERISTICS OF A CANTILEVER BEAM SPECIMEN

FOR HYSTERESIS LqOP STUDY (FIG. 5.3) --------------------------- 87
5.2
ASSUMED CHARACTERISTICS OF A BEAM-COLUMN JOINT SPECIMEN

FOR LOAD-DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIP STUDY (FIG. 5.5) ------------ 88
5.3
ASSUMED CHARACTERISTICS OF A CANTILEVER WALL SPECIMEN

FOR LOAD-DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIP STUDY ----------------------- 90
6.1
SUMMARY OF ASSUMED ANALYTICAL CONDITIONS FOR

NUMERICAL EXAMPLES --------------------------------------------- 93
6.2
ASSUMED MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES ---------- 95
6.3
CONFIGURATIONS OF THE STRUCTURES FW-1 AND FW-2 ----------------- 96
6.4
STIFFNESS PROPERTIES OF CONSTITUENT MEMBERS

OF THE STRUCTURES FW-1 AND FW-2 -------------------------------- 97
6.5
MODE SHAPES AND FREQUENCIES OF THE STRUCTURES FW-1 AND FW-2 ---- 101
6.6
MAXIMUM RESPONSES OF FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES --------------------- 103
6.7
PROPERTIES OF LAYERED MODEL USED FOR THE STRUCTURE FW-2 -------- 109
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
2.1
REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME-WALL TEST STRUCTURE ------------------ 110
2.2
REINFORCEMENT DETAILS OF STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS ----------------- 111
2.3
DEFORMATION MODES OF FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES --------------------- 113
2.4
CURVATURE DISTRIBUTION ALONG A CANTILEVER BEAM ----------------- 114
2.5
MECHANICAL MODELS USED IN INVESTIGATION ------------------------ 115
3.1
IDEALIZED STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS FOR CONCRETE AND STEEL

FOR THE CONCENTRATED SPRING AND MULTIPLE SPRING MODELS --------- 116
3.2
DISTRIBUTIONS OF STRESS AND STRAIN OVER A CROSS SECTION -------- 117
3.3
IDEALIZED MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP USED FOR THE

CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL -------------------------------------- 118
3.4
IDEALIZED MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIP USED FOR THE

CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL -------------------------------------- 118
3.5
IDEALIZED MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP FOR EACH SPRING

OF THE ~JLTIPLE SPRING MODEL ----------------------------------- 119
3.6
IDEALIZED STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS USED WITH THE

LAYERED MJJEl -------------------------------------------------- 120
3.7
DISTR!SJTIJNS OF STRESS AND STRAIN OVER A CROSS SECTION

OF THE LAYERED MODEL ------------------------------------------- 121
3.8
INSTA\~~\[
THE
3.9
BONJ
S MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS FOR

OF THE LAYERED MODEL ----------------------- 122
L~Y~~[J ~ECTION
s~ p ~ C~ANISM
3.10 COMP';;;::SC,
OF
-------------------------------------------- 123
COMPUTED BOND SLIP WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA -------- 124-
3.11
TYPICA~ LQ~J-D!SPLACEMENT
CURVES FOR INELASTIC ANALYSIS -------- 125
4.1
DEFORMED SYAPES OF A CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL

AND AN EQUIV.~LENT SIMPLE BEAM MODEL ---------------------------- 126
4.2
TYPICAL MEMBERS IN GLOBAL COORDINATES SYSTEM ------------------- 127
4.3
MULTIPLE SPRING MODEL ------------------------------------------ 128
4.4
APPLICATION OF THE LAYERED MODEL TO 1ST STORY

EXTERIOR COLUMNS ----------------------------------------------- 129
viii
Figure
Page
4.5
GLOBAL COORDINATES: DISPLACEMENTS OF THE i-th AND

i-1-th STORIES OF THE STRUCTURE -------------------------------- 130
5.1
HYSTERESIS MODEL 1 (TAKEDA MODEL) ------------------------------ 131
5.2
HYSTERESIS MODEL 2 --------------------------------------------- 132
5.3
COMPUTED MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIPS OF A

CANTILEVER BEAM USING HYSTERESIS MODEL 2 ----------------------- 133
5.4
FORCE-DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIPS OF A CANTILEVER BEAM ---------- 134
5.5
FORCE-DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIPS OF BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS --------- 137
5.6
ASSUMED AXIAL LOADS USED IN COLUMN MEMBERS

WHEN ESTABLISHING HYSTERESIS RULES ----------------------------- 138
6.1
BASE SHEAR-TOP DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIPS OF THE STRUCTURES

UNDER MONOTONICALLY INCREASING EXTERNAL LOAD ------------------- 139
6.2
MOMENT DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS AT THE COLLAPSE LOAD (FW-2) ------- 140
6.3
REDISTRIBUTION OF BASE SHEAR BETWEEN WALL AND COLUMNS

OF STRUCTURE FW-1 UNDER MONOTONICALLY INCREASING LOAD ---------- 142
6.4

OF STRUCTURE FW-2 UNDER MONOTONICALLY INCREASING LOAD ---------- 143
6.5
COLLAPSE MECHANISM FOR STRUCTURE FW-1 UNDER STATIC

TRIANGULAR LATERAL LOADING ------------------------------------- 144
6.6
COLLAPSE MECHANISM FOR STRUCTURE FW-2 UNDER STATIC

TRIANGULAR LATERAL LOADING ------------------------------------- 145
6.7
BASE ACCELERATION WAVEFORMS AS OBSERVED IN TESTS AND

COMPARISON WITH THOSE USED FOR RESPONSE ANALYSIS --------------- 146
6.8
MODE SHAPES OF STRUCTURE FW-1 ---------------------------------- 147
6.9
MODE SHAPES OF STRUCTURE FW-2 ---------------------------------- 148
6.10
RESPONSE WAVEFORMS FOR STRUCTURE FW-1, RUN-1 ------------------- 149
6.11
6.12
6.13 RESPONSE WAVEFORMS FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-2 -------------------162
ix
Figure
Page
6.14 RESPONSE WAVEFORMS FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-2

USING HYSTERESIS MODELS 1 AND 2 -------------------------------- 167
6.15 MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIPS OF THE FLEXURAL SPRING
AT THE 5TH LEVEL LEFT EXTERIOR BEAM ---------------------------- 169
6.16 MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIPS OF THE FLEXURAL SPRING
USING HYSTERESIS MODELS 1 AND 2 AT THE
5TH LEVEL LEFT EXTERIOR BEAM ----------------------------------- 171
6.17 MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIPS OF A FLEXURAL SPRING
AT THE BASE OF THE LEFT COLUMN --------------------------------- 172'
6.18 MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE FLEXURAL SPRING
AT THE BASE ELEMENT OF THE WALL -------------------------------- 174
6.19
BASE OVERTURNING MOMENT VS. TOP-STORY DISPLACEMENT

RELATIONSHIPS OF THE STRUCTURES -------------------------------- 175
6.20
RESPONSE WAVEFORMS FOR AXIAL FORCE

AT THE BASE OF THE LEFT COLUMN --------------------------------- 177
6.21
COMPUTED STRUCTURAL YIELD PATTERNS (STRUCTURE FW-1, RUN-1) ----- 179
6.22 OBSERVED CRACK PATTERNS IN STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-2 --------------- 183

6.23
BASE SHEAR VS. TOP-STORY DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIPS

OF STRUCTURE FW-2 USING CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL AND
LAYERED MODEL -------------------------------------------------- 184
6.24 MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE LAYERED SECTION

AT THE BASE OF THE COLUMNS ------------------------------------- 185
6.25
LOADING PATH AT THE BASE OF THE EXTERIOR COLUMNS --------------- 186
6.26

OF STRUCTURE FW-2 USING CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL
AND LAYERED MODEL FOR SINGLE CYCLE OF LOADING ------------------ 187
6.27 MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE LAYERED SECTION

AT THE BASE OF THE COLUMNS FOR SINGLE CYCLE OF LOADING --------- 188
6.28 BEHAVIOR OF THE LAYERED SECTION AT THE BASE
OF THE COLUMNS FOR SINGLE CYCLE OF LOADING --------------------- 189
B. 1
FLOW DIAGRAM OF COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR NONLINEAR RESPONSE

ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME-WALL SYSTEMS -------------200
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introductory Remarks
When designing
reinforced
concrete
structures,
one
important
aspect to be decided is the insurance of an adequate stiffness to resist

lateral forces caused by such events as
loadings.
The
forces
associated
stresses and induce vibration, etc.

which
have
high
inplane
resist
horizontal
forces,
their stiffness, is normally much

provided
by
walls.
Also
with
winds,
or
blast
these events can produce high
Reinforced
concrete
shear
walls,
stiffness, are often used to economically
provide the necessary resistance to

also
earthquakes,
such
but
horizontal
forces.
Columns
their contribution, depending on
smaller
nonlinear
than
that
which
characteristics
members relative to those of wall types tend to
of
further
would
be
column type
degrade
their
contribution.
Recent studies of damage caused by
that
the
significant
inelastic
strong
deformation
earthquakes
indicate
reinforced
concrete
to
structural components has to be taken into consideration when

a
reinforced
concrete
structure.
For
desirable that such inelastic action should

beams
in
order
to
prevent
proper
take
structure,
place
first
collapse of the structure.
been
the
decade[3,13,30],
objective
but
of
there
extensive
are
aspects
investigation
that
are
it
in
is
the
The inelastic
behavior of reinforced concrete structures in an earthquake

has
designing
over
still
environment
the
not
past
fully
2
understood.
inelastic
analyzing
In
range,
many
reinforced
phenomena
concrete
arise
which
structures
have
in
to be taken into
consideration, such as cracking, crushing of concrete, yielding,

hardening
of
reinforcing
steel,
the
strain
and bond slip, to name a few.
These
characteristics make the analysis complicated.

In
this
study,
the
analysis
of idealized reinforced concrete
plane frame-wall structures will be treated

assumptions
such
as
the
on
the
basis
of
certain
substitute frame structure, fixed inflection
point locations in members, concentrated mass at each floor level,

These
assumptions
affecting its
etc.
are made to simplify the analysis while not markedly

The
accuracy_
study
presented
is
limited
to
plane
structures of laboratory test specimens.

1.2 Review Q[ Previous Research
When
analyzing
a reinforced concrete structural system deformed
beyond its elastic range, it is obviously very important

idealized
choose
an
element model suitable to represent the inelastic behavior of
the reinforced concrete member components.

which
to
Many
different
approaches
take into account material and geometric nonlinearities have been
reported in the literature.
Several of the more successful
models
are
Giberson[151 proposed a concentrated spring model for column
and
discribed below.
beam
elements.
spring attached
His model consists of a linearly elastic member with a

at
each
end.
These
springs
take
nonlinear characteristics that occur within the members.

nonlinear
analysis
was
applied
to
reinforced
account
of
any
This model for
concrete
multi-story
3
structures.
have
This
different
model
is versatile since the spring at each end can
curvilinear
or
bilinear
hysteretic
characteristics.
Otani's[34] combined two cantilever beam model with
nonlinear
belongs to the class of concentrated spring models.
Concentrated spring
models are effective for the
distributions
fixed inflection points.
antisymmetric
moment
springs,
with
Otani's model also demonstrates good agreement
between analytical and test results.

Benuska[10]
presented
divided into two imaginary

element
to
two-component
parallel
elements.
model
with the members
There
is
an
elastic
represent the linear phase and an elasto-plastic element to
represent a yielding
This
characteristic.
model
was
applied
to
nonlinear analysis of a 20-story open frame structure.

Takizawa[45] assumed the distribution of flexural rigidity
a
member element to be that of a parabolic function.
is used in the determination of

inflection
point
is
not
the
fixed
member
in
this
This distribution
flexibility
model.
along
matrix.
The
This model has been
applied to the nonlinear analysis of a 3-story reinforced concrete frame

structure.
Takayanagi[421 has presented a multiple
analyzing
wall
members.
This
model
subelements along its longitudinal axis.
spring
beam
model
for
divides the member into several

Each subelement has a
uniform
flexural rigidity which changes based on the hysteresis loop appropriate

to each subelement.
This model
is
effective
for
distribution
of
moment whose inflection point can lie outside of the element.

A somewhat different approach to analyzing inelastic behavior
reinforced concrete members is the layering concept.
of
This can be a very
4
effective tool.
In this approach the cross section is
number of layers.
which
depend
Each
layer
has
material
divided
behavior
into
characteristics
on the stress-strain curve of its material in its current
state of deformation.
The stress resultants for
cross
section
are
then obtained by integrating or summing the layer contributions.

Park et al[24,36,37J investigated the stress-strain
concrete
under
the
stress
distributions
due
to
cyclic
Aktan[51 and Karlsson[23] have studied, with such a procedure,
moment-curvature
subjected
relationships
to load reversals.
of
reinforced
used
in
the
moment-curvature
above
concrete
columns
They have obtained satisfactory agreement
between calculated and measured relationships.

is
of
cyclic loading by this method and showed that the layer
method can cope with the complex

loading.
behavior
mentioned
relationships
As an
layering
of
iteration
method
member,
when
this
scheme
calculating
method
has
the
disadvantage of requiring a large amount of computation time.

Hand[17] also applied a layering method
plates
and
shells
and
suggested
it
would
to
reinforced
be
concrete
valuable tool for
determining structural behavior in the intermediate region
between
the
elastic and limit states.

The finite element method in the form of
has
been
applied
structures[4,38,41].
satisfactory
components.
substantial
multistory
tool
However,
to
inelastic
Such
for
analyses
two-dimensional
inelastic
the
of
stress
analysis
reinforced
concrete
analyses
analyses
computational
plane
of
effort
some
have
been
isolated
involved
can
wall
be
so that the use of plane stress elements for wall panels of

structures
would
be
practical
only
in
very
unusual
circumstances.
Yuzugullu[51]
investigated
the
system for monotonic, increasing load.

concrete
shear
panels
under
requires
so,
analyzed
reinforced
They both obtained good
However, such a
finite
element
quite a large number of elements if the local stress
distribution is important.
much
of a shear wall frame
Darwin[12]
cyclic loading.
correlation with experimental results.

analysis
behavior
Therefore this approach is costly, maybe too
for use on large scale reinforced concrete structural systems
such as those being investigated in
this
study.
The
finite
element
analysis still has a very promising future but on more limited problems.
1.3 Object and Scope
The
objective
of
this study is to investigate analytically the
nonlinear seismic behavior of reinforced concrete frame-wall

and
with
structures
that analysis to trace the development of a failure mechanism
for these structures.

First
of
all, three types of mechanical models
spring beam model, a multiple spring beam

model,
which
c~n
take
model,
and
a concentrated.
a
layered
into account both the linear and the nonlinear
behavior of such reinforced concrete cantilever beams are presented.

describe
beams,
the
a
curvatures
nonlinear
numerical
and
beam
To
behavior of the reinforced concrete cantilever
procedure
deflections.
is
presented
The
for
computing
moments,
selection of the analytical models,
which is to be used to analyze the structure, depends upon the
physical
loading condition that exists.

In order to
establish
the
force-deflection
relations
'"
7":~ Y:..~''"
,.'
(~
'-"" -;.; "
;" '~1~~:....; ,.:} ',l ~
of
:-
the
6
structure,
beam-column
structure
are
component
investigated.
In
and
this
single
respect,
member: beams, columns, and the wall, a degrading

loop is adopted.
shear wall of the
for each constituent

trilinear
hysteresis
But this hysteresis loop does not include any pinching
effect which might occur in the structural components being

second new hysteresis rule is therefore presented.
was developed primarily for application to
the
tested.
This hysteresis rule
beam
members
in
this
structure.
Finally, the frame-wall structure is modelled as a
has
to
A layered
is
Furthermore in this
a substitute-frame system has been chosen as the frame subsystem
model because the structure being modelled has

aspect
model
the first story exterior columns of the structure only when
the effect of changing axial force is investigated.

phase,
which
concentrated spring model for the beam and column elements and a
multiple spring beam model for the wall elements.

applied
system
while
the
geometrical
symmetry
frame is subjected to antisymmetrical loading.
This
substitute frame system described in Chapter 2 reduces significantly the

computation time.
The instantaneous
nonlinear
characteristics
investigated
estimated
and
constituent member under
earthquake
numerically
the
being
are
integrating
strong
equations
the
of
of
the
structure
failure processes of each

motion
motion
are
in
traced
by
a step by step
method.
A computer
program
calculations of the analysis.
is
developed
to
carry
The computed results
compared with the available test results.
out the numerical

are
discussed
and
7
This study is a continuation of the work which was
initiated
by
Otani[34] for the reinforced concrete frame structures, and followed
by
Takayanagi[42] for the coupled shear wall structures.
CHAPTER 2
STRUCTURAL SYSTEM AND MECHANICAL MODELS
2.1 Structural System
The test structure(Fig.2.1) to be analyzed
story,
three
bay
frames
consists
of
surrounding a slender shear wall.
wall is placed at the center of the structure in the plan.
is joined to the frames with connections that transmit

motion.
It
is
assumed
same
horizontal
All elements of
level.
The
frame
undergo
lumped
at
each
structure is considered to be fixed at the base.
the framed structure.
shown in Fig.2.2.
horizontal
A total floor weight
considered
"weak beam-strong column" design was made for

for
the
Thus the wall
only
each
motion at each story level.
including story weight of the structure is

floor
was
that each floor diaphragm is displaced in its
horizontal plane as a rigid body.

the
The shear
It
intention that the wall not be subjected to gravity load.
two-ten
The
lateral
load
resistance
The details of the structural components are
reinforcing
schedule
for
the
structures
is
tabulated in Table 2.1.

2.2 An Analytical Model 1QL Frame-Wall Structures
A simplified approximate procedure is adopted for the analysis of
this
frame-wall
rectangular
structure.
frame
which
antisymmetrical loadings.
beam,
which
is
The
is
being
Therefore
approximately
frame
at
structure
investigated
the
the
is
for
contraflexure
center
symmetrical
the
case
point
of
of
the
of the beam length, is
assumed to be a roller joint.
The symmetrical placement of a shear wall
in the structure allows the structure

manner.
Therefore
to
respond
in
planar
the entire system is idealized as a plane structure
composed of two systems as shown in Fig.2.3.

isolated
still
shear wall.
One of these systems is an
The second system is a substitute frame structure
which models the two parallel-rigid frames as a frame substructure.

substitute
frame
structure
one interior frame.

exterior
The
system consists of two exterior frames and
In defining
the
stiffness
characteristics,
each
frame and the interior frame of the substitute frame structure
represent two exterior parts and four interior parts of the actual frame
structure, respectively.
The
snea~
wall is treated as a vertical cantilever beam which
subjected only to horizontal loading.
With the diaphragms assumed rigid
in their own planes, all the frames and the shear wall sway by the
amount
at each rloor level.
walls etc.,
15 a~tached
is
same
Each of the structural components: frames,
by links to
the
adjacent
components
at
each
floor level.
Whe~
inelastlc
from
the
r~:r;rorced
ra~l.t
lt~
its
cantilever beam is loaded into the
end rotation and tip
!~s~r~~.Jtlon
moment-are3 methoj.
concrete
of
curvatures
deflection
along
can
be
computed
the beam by means of the
The cantilever beam containing flexural cracks
has
moment dlagram and the distribution of curvatures along this member
as shown in Fig.2.4[24,46].
distribution
of
For
computational
purposes,
this
actual
curvatures is simplified into three types of shapes of
10
distribution of curvatures
as
shown
in
Fig.2.5.
mechanical models are also shown in the figure.

mechanical
models,
The
These
corresponding
three
types
of
therefore, can take into account nonlinear behavior
of a reinforced concrete cantilever beam.

concentrated
The
spring
model
is
the
one
developed based on inelastic action of a cantilever

consists
of
which
beam.
Otani[32]
This
model
a flexible elastic line element and a nonlinear rotational
spring at the end of the cantilever beam as shown
in
Fig.2.5(a).
The
curvature distribution along the beam, such as that which might occur at
ultimate moment, as well as an
with
this
model
are
shown
idealized
in
curvature
Fig.2.5(a).
to
exist along the beam.
beam members of this
structure
used
The nonlinear rotational
spring can take care of the hatched portion of the

assumed
distribution
idealized
curvature
This model is quite suitable for the
being
investigated
since
the
moment
distribution of the fixed-hinged beam member is exactly the same as that

of the cantilever beam.
since
members
This model is also
to
the
column
the point of contraflexure can be assumed practically at
the center of the column length during

contraflexure
applicable
its
response
even
though
the
point of the upper columns shifts downwards while that of
the lower columns of the frame structure shifts upwards from the
center
of the column story height.

The multiple spring model is the one studied
This
is
as
Takayanagi[42].
line element model and is composed of a number of segments,
each of which handles independently both the linear

action
by
springs.
This
model
distribution along the beam are
as
shown
well
in
as
and
the
Fig.2.5(b).
the
nonlinear
assumed curvature
This
multiple
11
spring
model
general
is applicable to wall members which are exposed to a more
moment
of the frame.
fo~
distribution than is the case for the beams and columns

The centroid of each segment is used as the control point
the determination of the nonlinear properties of that segment.
interior or segment nodal
points
are
stiffness
it
used
matrix
before
structure.
Therefore only
structural
stiffness
is
story
matrix
condensed
displacements
The
used.
considered to be more reasonable than
of
the
element
in the analysis of the complete
level
as
out
All
line
plane
remain
element
stress
in
the
model
finite
is
element
model especially for a slender shear wall.

The layered model
alteration
of
shown
in
Fig.2.5(c)
is
the concentrated spring model.
modification
Instead of the nonlinear
rotational spring being in the form of a concentrated spring, a

cross
section
of
as
shown
layered
length, Lp, is assigned at the end of the cantilever
beam and connected to an elastic

length
or
in
Fig.2.5(c).
line
Lp
element.
is
an
inelastic
The inelastic flexural action of the
cantilever beam is calculated explicitly by the layered method which
is
derived from an overall moment-curvature relation reflecting the various

stages of material behavior of concrete and steel in the layered section
[17,49J.
This model has the advantage that the layered concept can take
care of the change of flexural rigidity due to

moment
case
and
where
a change in the axial force.

the
exterior
lower
level
both
change
in
the
This model is suitable to the

columns
are
subjected
to
significant change in the axial force during cyclic loadings.

These mechanical models are applied to
frame-wall
structures.
the
reinforced
concrete
It should be kept in mind that this analytical
12
work on nonlinear response of reinforced concrete frame-wall

is based on the flexural yielding capacity of
cantilever beam members.
the
reinforced
structures
concrete
13
CHAPTER 3
FORCE-DEFORMATION RELATIONSHIPS FOR CANTILEVER BEAM MODELS
The process of inelastic structural analysis includes the
of
models,
mechanical
establishment
the
relationships of mechanical models, and

mechanical
models
to
the
then
structure.
force-deformation
of
the
This
choice
application
chapter
of
the
describes
the
force-deformation relationships of these mechanical models.

Idealized
stress-strain relationships for concrete and steel are
constructed in order that the three mechanical models can have a

shape
basic
for
each
concrete
and
steel.
Then
these
common
idealized
stress-strain relationships for concrete and steel are used in order

construct
model.
in
inelastic force-deformation relationships for each mechanical
Sm3.11 aggregate concrete and plain annealed wire steel are
this
to
study.
used
The mechanical properties for this concrete and steel
are described in detail in Ref.[2J.

the
For
relationship
is
moment-curvature
concentrated
obtained
relationship
spring
from
the
the
force-deformation
idealized
quarter-cycle
of the type shown in Fig.3.3.
force-deformation relationship is used

development
model,
of the hysteresis rule.
as
the
primary
Then this
curve
in
the
The inelastic deformation in later
stages can be obtained from direct application of the hysteresis rules.

For
approach
a
is
multiple
used
in
spring model, a modified EI (flexural rigidity)

each
spring.
An
idealized
quarter
cycle
14
moment-curvature
hysteresis
relationship
rule.
The
is
modified
used
as
the
primary curve for the
EI to be used at each subsequent load
increment is obtained in turn from the developed hysteresis rules.

For
the
layered
assumed.
layered
section.
It
includes
model, the modified EI approach is again used at

An
the
cyclic loading effect which
overall
changing
reflect
moment-curvature
relationship
is
axial load effect as well as the

directly
the
various
stages
of
material behavior.
3.2 Concentrated Spring Model and Multiple Spring Model
3.2.1 Stress-Strain Relationship for Concrete
The stress-strain relationship for concrete is constructed from a
parabola
combined
with
straight line as proposed by Hognestad[21J.
The various branches of these defining relationships are:

E:
E:
< E:
C -
< E:
t -
< S
C -
(3. 1 )
and
St
= E: a
[1 - (1 - f /f,)1/2]
te
where
= stress of concrete
f' = compressive uniaxial strength of concrete

C
f
tensile strength of concrete,

t =
a.5F: ,
(t1pa)
15
Sc
So
St
Z
= strain of
= strain at
= strain at
= constant
concrete
which f'C is attained
which f t is at tained
which
defines
the
desending
slope
of
the
stress-strain curve, assumed to be 100 [34]

The proposed curve is shown in Fig.3.1(a).
3.2.2 Stress-Strain Relationship for Steel
A piecewise linear stress-strain relationship is adopted for the
reinforcing steel.
-< S Y
fs = Esss
f s = fy
Sy -< S s -< Ss h
(3.2)
f S = f + E h(s - ssh)
Y
s s
f s = fu
ssh
<
Su -<
< S
Ss s
where
S
= stress
= yield
ultimate stress of steel
ES
strain of steel
E
y
strain at which f y is attained
....'" sh
strain at which strain hardening commences
e:
strain at which f u is attained
f
f
f
Es
Esh
of steel
stress of steel
= modulus of elasticity of steel

= modulus to define stiffness in strain hardening range
16 The
yield
averaging
the
wire[2].
The
stress,fy '
results
and
from
proposed
ultimate
stress,f u' are obtained by
a number of coupon samples taken from the
stress-strain
curve
for
the
steel
is
that
described in Ref.[42] and shown in Fig.3.1(b).

3.2.3 Moment-Curvature Relationship
Based
on
Q[~
Section
the idealized stress-strain properties of concrete and
reinforcing steel just described, a moment-curvature relationship can be

constructed.
The
relationship is based on the geometry of the section
and on the assumption of linear variation of strain through the depth as

shown
in
The
Fig.3.2.
strains and curvature are related through the
well known equations as follows:
= e: e Ie
= e:~/(e
(3.3)
- d')
where
Ee
~I
~S'
d', d
= curvature
= concrete strain at the extreme compressive fiber
= strain in the compressive,tensile steel, respectively
= distance from the extreme compressive fiber to the center
of compressive, tensile steel, respectively
e
From
= depth
of the neutral axis
equilibrium
conditions
for
the
section,
we
have
the
following expressions.
= re
J
-e'
e
Ce
= )r
-e'
febdx + A'f'
s s - As f s
febxdx
(3.4)
(3.5)
17
M= CC(C p - yC) + A~f~(Cp - d
l
)
+ ASfS(d - Cp)
where
f~,
fs = stress of the compressive,tensile steel, respectively

b
AI
5'
= width
= area
of the cross section

of the compressive,tensile steel, respectively
N = axial load acting on the section

C
c
= concrete
compression force
Cp' yC = distance from the extreme compression fiber to centroid of

axial load, concrete compression force, respectively
c'
= distance
from the neutral axis to the point of the maximum
tensile stress of the concrete
M= bending moment about centroid of axial load

x
Using
= distance
from the neutral axis
Eqs.(3.1)
and
(3.2), the stresses fe' fs' and fs

I
determined for given strains s ,s , and s ,respectively.
e s
of
the
The
can be
location
neutral axis denoted by, c, can be obtained with given se and N
from Eqs.C3.3) and (3.4) using an iteration method.
The
moment
M and
curvature can be calculated from Eqs.(3.3) and (3.5)

Flexural cracking at a cross section is assumed to occur when the
stress
at
the extreme tension fiber of the section reaches the tensile
strength of the concrete.
The flexural cracking moment M
is
computed
using simple bending theory as follows:
M
c
=.=..9..
Yt
(f
+!:!.)
A
where
N = axial force on a section, compression positive
A = area
of a cross section
(3.6)
18
= moment of inertia of a gross section

Yt = distance from neutral axis of the section
to extreme fiber
in tension
Flexural
yielding
is
defined as the point at which the tensile
reinforcement reaches its yield strain.
If the tensile reinforcement is
arranged in several layers,yielding will occur gradually starting at the

outer layer of the tension reinforcement and
closest
to
the
neutral
axis
relationship requires a definite

moment
MY
proceeding
of the section.
value
for
to
the
layer
Because the hysteresis
the
yield
moment,
yield
is defined as the moment corresponding to the development of a
yield strain at the centroid of the reinforcement working in tension.
3.2.4 Idealized Moment Curvature Relationships
1QL~
Concentrated
Soring Model
Using
ultimate,
the
the
three
values
moment-curvature
of
moment:
cracking,
relationship
is
yielding,
idealized
by
and
three
straight lines as follows[34],(Fig.3.3):
= IT
M-< M
c
~Y M
= ~y
Mc
~ rr
1 (M
M+
y Y
and
M
Ely
- M
u - y
~
y
1) ,
<
M< M
- Y
(3.7)
My
<
19
where
E1 = initial
M= bending
flexural rigidity
moment
Me' My' Mu = cracking, yielding, ultimate moment, respectively

<P
= curvature
= curvature
3.2.5
at cracking, yielding, ultimate, respectively
Rotation
due
Inelastic
tQ
Idealized Moment-Curvature Relationships for

Displacement
at
Action
Based
on
Concentrated Spring Model
the free end of a cantilever beam is calculated
from the curvature distribution along

effectively
Flexural
concentrated
at
the
member
free
assumed to be distributed linearly.
length.
With
the
load
end, the bending moment can be
The free end displacement D(M)
can
be expressed as follows[34]:
L2M
M-< Me
D(M) = 3EI
2
D(M) = L3 [1 _ ( 3 ) cP MM + a2cp J
y y
c
D(My ) = L3 [(1
y ) CPy +
0.
a.~
cP e J
(3.8)
2
D(M)
=~[C2
+B)(1 - B){B + Ei
(1 - B)}
Y
+ 8(1 + B) - 20.
L2
D(M u ) =-6 [(2 + B )(1 - B ){B
L2
1f + 3i
cP
a. c
+ -EI (1 - B )}
u
y
u
cP
2
+ B (1 + B ) - 2o. 3J ~ + 1- 0. 2 cP
u
u
u B
3 u c
U
M< M
Y
20
where
L
= length
el
= -f..
M
of the cantilever beam
_ Mc
ely - My
(3.9)
_ Mc
a. u - Mu
M
6 = ..1
M
Average rotation of the cantilever beam is
e = QlliL
L
Slopes
in
the
three
stages
(3. 10)
of
the
idealized
trilinear
moment-displacement relationship are expressed as follows:
SO,
= D(Mc )
c
M
where
S02
= O(M}
S03
= D(M
o -<
- Mc
- D(M )
Mu - M
) U
otMy}
M< M
Mc -< M-< My
<
(3.11)
21
instantaneous stiffness of the concentrated
spring
model
of unit length (Fig.3.4)

The
incremental rotation of the cantilever beam can be expressed
by the instantaneous rotational stiffness

~e = -
SO.1
(3.12)
where
~e
= incremental
6M
= increment
rotation of a cantilever beam

of
external
moment
at
the
fixed
end
of a
cantil ever beam
= length
of a cantilever beam
The idealized moment-rotation relationships obtained are shown in

Fig.3. 4 and are used as the primary curve for the hysteresis rule.
3.2.6 fQr;e-Disolacement Relationship for ..a Multiple Spring Model

This mo1el is composed of a series of segments.
be
subjecte~
flexural
a different level of
5t:frr~~~
existing at
are
t~
~~~
nonlinearity.
Each segment can

The
instantaneous
of each segment is derived from the stress resultants
:e~troid
of each segment.
Forces
vary
but
properties
con!5ta~t.
Fi~XJr~.
~:gljlties
~
=-
El.1
E11 =
E12
(slope) can be defined for each segment[42].
E13 =
Me
<Pe
M-< Me
M - Me
Y..
<Py - <Pc
Mu
- M
Y
<P u - <Py
(3.13)
Me < M-< My
M < M
y-
22
where
rigidity
Ell' EI 2 , EI 3 = fl exural
before
cracking,
from
cracking
to
yielding, and after yielding, respectively

The
idealized
moment-curvature
relationship
built
from three
straight lines is shown in Fig.3.5 for the multiple spring model.

3.3 Layered Model
The cross section in the inelastic zone (fixed end portion) of
cantilever
beam
is
divided
into layers of equal thickness.
layer, the concrete inside the stirrup is considered as

that
outside
is taken as unconfined.
For each
confined
while
The length, Lp, of the inelastic
zone is arbitrary, say Lp= o.5*(depth of beam).
The depth to each layer
of steel and the area of steel at that level are also specified.
3.3.1 Stress-Strain Relationship for Concrete

The tensile stress of concrete is now neglected.
This is because
this simplification is needed for the iteration procedure in this

and
this
modification
does
characteristics of this model.

capacity,
the
the previously
stress-strain
proposed
unconfined
concrete.
can have a
common
affect
not
With
the
overall
monotonically
model
stiffness
increasing
load
curve for the compressed concrete follows
shape
in
Eq.3.1(a)
for
both
confined
and
Thus the three analytical cantilever beam models
basic
shape.
The
unconfined
provides no contribution at strains greater than
ECU
concrete,
however,
= 0.004.
Because of the nature of the problem the analysis is required
to
23
predict
into
unloading from an inelastic state and subsequent reloading back
that
inelastic range.
The shape of the model curve for the above
case is assumed to be based on the values of Ee ' strain on the envelope

curve (Fig.3.6(a)) at which unloading starts, and En' the plastic strain
remaining after all load has been released [12,39J.
strains
are
related
by
the
following
Values
equation
for
these
which was developed
experimentally by Karsan and Jirsa [22J.
e:
With
the Ee
established, a linear equation is used for unloading from
point on
Subsequent
(3.14)
cu
the
envelope
reloading
Ee
to
curve
passing
follows
back
toward
on
the
the same
En
point.
line.
This
equation is
(3.15)
where
f
en
= concrete
stress at which the concrete strain is
Ee
This rule is shown in Fig.3.6(a).
3.3.2 Stress-Strain Relationship for Steel

For
simplicity
hardening rule
consiered.
have
been
bilinear
assumed.
stress-strain
The
Bauschinger
relationship
effect
is
and
not
Such bilinear behavior with strain hardening representation
for the general loading case is reasonable when detailed test
data
are
24
not
line
available.
between
The
the
EY
strain hardening stiffness
yield
point
and
the
point
is the slope of the
at which the ultimate
strength is attained on the primary stress-strain curve.
This
rule
is
shown in Fig.3.6(b).
3.3.3 Moment Curvature Relationships for

Assuming
linear
Layered Section
strain distribution through the depth of the
layered cross section, values of curvature and the position

axis
define
neutral
the strains at the center lines of each c6ncrete and steel
layer (Fig.3.7).
process
of
using
These two quantities are determined

the
Newton-Raphson
method
to
by
an
iterative
satisfy the equilibrium
conditions[161.
N a Cc + Cs
1
T
(3.16)
M= T(d - Cp) + C1(C

- d')
+ Cp
(C - yC)
s p
C
where
r
~c
2~~~rete
compression force
C'
~~~e:
compression force
~~~e:
tension force
cp
j:5~an~e
lx:a~
yC
As
the
from the extreme compression fiber to centroid of
load
j~~ta~~e
from the extreme compression fiber to centroid of
~or;~rete
compressive force
external
axial
force
can be changing within each load
increment, the moment M; becomes a function of the
axial
force
N1
as
25
well as the curvature <p. as follows:
M.
The
instantaneous
= m( cp 1.,
N.)
1
rigidity EI. of the layered section
flexural
can be expressed as (Fig.3.8)
~.
Eli
(3.17)
= ~cp.
where
, = M.,
~.
6.cp.,
= cp.1
(3.18)
cp.1- 1
The effect of changing axial force on the instantaneous

rigidity
EI. is included in the6M. term.
The secondary bending moment
created from both axial force and member deflection is

account.
flexural
not
taken
into
The nonlinearity of axial rigidity EA; is also neglected.
3.3.4 Moment-Rotation Relationship for

Displacement
D(M)
at
the
free
end
Layered Model
of
cantilever beam is
calculated from the curvature distribution along its length.
t
L
D(M) =
(</l(x))
dx
(3.19)
where
cp(x)
= !iW..
EI
o <
X < L - L
P
(3.20)
cp(x) = M(x)
EI.1
L - L
< X < L
26
is the length of the inelastic zone at the fixed
cantilever beam.
from
the
free
of
the
(x) is the curvature as a function of the distance
end
of the cantilever beam.
free end of the cantilever beam.
The moment M(x) along the
beam is linear because applied loads are assumed to be

the
end
concentrated
at
The end rotation is then computed
as,
e = .Ql&
L
The
incremental
rotation
(3.21)
of
~e
expressed by the instantaneous rotational
the
layered
model
fL
flexibility
can
be
similar
to
Eq. 3. 12.
~e
=fL
(3.22)
This is used to obtain the member stiffness later.

3.4 Additional Considerations for Each Model
3.4.1 Shear Deformation
Because of the uncertainty regarding inelastic shear deformations
of reinforced concrete members, such shear deformations
from
an
elastic
shear
deformation
multiplied
are
calculated
by a reduction factor
a =0.5 . This factor takes account of the effect of nonlinear deformation

by simply reducing the uncracked shear stiffness(11.
The shear rigidity
is then assumed to remain constant throughout the whole process.

modulus
is
computed from the equation,
is Poisson's ratio.
Ec/(2(1+~))
Shear
Withl"'=1/6, where
27
3.4.2 Rotation due 1Q Bond Slippage of Embedded Steel
Rotation
due
to the slip of the tensile reinforcement along its
embedded length must be taken into account.

flexibility
due
to
bond
In
order
to
formulate
slippage, the following assumptions are made
(Fig. 3.9) .
1.
Bond stress is
reinforcement.
2.
The reinforcement embedment length is sufficient to provide the

maximum tensile stress.
3.
The steel stress decreases linearly with distance in from the

beam or column face.
Then
the
constant
development
along
length
the
and
embedded
length of the
the elongationsAL of the
reinforcement are obtained as [26,34J,
f s -< f y
f2L
~L
2fsEs
r-
o l~
Es
4u
[1
ff J[fE fs 2Ey- fY1 L,
-1 --Y+
[fs -1) +
f Y -< f s
(f s - f~)2l
2Ey
where
As =
(3.23)
cross sectional area of the tensile reinforcement
= stress of the
o = diameter of a
u = average bond
reinforcement at the face of column or beam
reinforcing bar
stress,
O.5JfC efe :Mpa)
for plain wire
28
gages[14]
Es
= Youngs
modulus of the reinforcement
Ey = inelastic modulus of the reinforcement after yielding

fy
= yield
Because
stress of the reinforcement
the
stress
in
reinforcement
after
yielding does not
differ markedly from the value at yield, the equation for the elongation
can be written in a single simple form.
1
0
2
DEs 2
6L=-8-f - - s
Esu S - 8u S
(3.24)
The elongation due to bond slippage is a function of steel stress

or
steel strain as seen in Eq.3.24.
with experimental results

stress,
E
u,
is
assumed
obtained
to
be
In Figure 3.10 Eq.3.24 is compared

by
Wight[49]
JfC
1. 1 7
where
average
bond
(Mpa) for No.6 deformed bars,
=200000 (Mpa) , fc. =34.5 (Mpa) , and area of a bar AS =284 (MM**2) .
Assuming
that
rotation axis due to slippage of the tensile
the
reinforcement is at the level of compressive reinforcement and that

stress
in
the
the tensile reinforcement is proportional to the moment, the
moment-rotation
can be expressed as follows:
rel~tjonship
s - J..
11 Then
R(M)
(3.25)
M
Y
=d
L
- d'
(3.26)
where
29
= acting
stress
reinforcement
yielding
and
at
the
section
stress
where
the
of
bond
tensile
slippage
is
considered, respectively
M, My = acting
moment
and
yielding
moment at the section where
bond slippage is considered, respectively
R(M)
d, d'
= rotation
= depth
due to the slip
of the tensile
reinforcement
and
the
to
be
compressive
reinforcement, respectively
The rotation R(M) due to bar slip
is
seen
quadratic
function of the acting moment M.

The idealized moment-rotation relationship can be
Eq.3.26
obtained
from
in any form, the original curve itself, a bilinear modification
curve, or a trilinear modification curve.

For
the
trilinear
modification curve, the flexibilities in the
three stages of the idealized
trilinear
moment-rotation
relationships
are defined as,
M-< Me
Me -< M-< My
M < M
y-
where
(3.27)
30
at
rotation
which
the
cracking,
yielding and the
the
ultimate moment is developed, respectively

fb(M)
= flexibility
due
to
the
slippage
bond
tensile
of
reinforcement
The flexibility
f~M)
is then used as a part of the
instantaneous
moment-rotation relationship of a rotational spring as
(3.28)
3.4.3 Assumptions for Inelastic Analysis

Generally,
when
inelastic
analysis
characteristics of constituent members

Figures
of
is
structure
difficulty
jn
proceeding
In both
cases,
examined.
always
positive
regardless
Figures 3.11(c) and (d) also
show
of
loading
phenomenon
characteristics.
and
The
types
of
snap-through
instantaneous
to
erroneous
results
of
purpose.
stiffness
no
is
members
curves
These are a decreasing

in
stiffness
stiffness becomes negative due to
in
of
the
constituent
replaced
by
members
and
behavior of the structure.
Special consideration is given to modify these phenomenon.

instantaneous
the
load-displacement
phenomenon
severe loss in the load carrying capacity

lead
is
or unloading conditions.
which one could encounter in inelastic analysis.

slope
there
with a load increment analysis technique for
inelastic analysis where the instantaneous stiffnesses
would
are
3.11(a) and (b) show the typical load-displacement curves which
appear in inelastic analyses of members.
are
stiffness
made,
The negative
a small positve one for that
31
CHAPTER 4
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE
This
chapter
reinforced
describes
method
of
inelastic
analysis
for
concrete frame-wall structures subjected to static loads and
to dynamic base excitations.

Three
mechanical
methods
are developed and introduced to study

The
the behavior of the constituent members of the structure.

are
studied as a cantilever beam action.
a concentrated spring model, a multiple

model,
are
each
applied
The three mechanical models :

spring
inelastic
model,
and
layered
to the constituent members of the frame-wall
structure taking into account their specific

during
members
behavior.
stiffness
characteristics
The concentrated spring model is intended
for primary application to the frame elements : column members and

members.
The
elements.
The layered model would
column
multiple
members
of
spring
model
be
is
to
be
applied
beam
applied to the wall
only
to
the
exterior
the first story of the structure to incorporate the
effect of variation of column axial force.

The
structural stiffnesses are constructed from each constituent
member stiffness.
nonlinear
then
used
to
construct
the
response history and failure mechanisms of frame-wall systems
subjected to
hysteresis
These stiffnesses are
static
rules
and
to
dynamic
loadings.
Trilinear
degrading
such as a Takeda model or a modified Takeda model are
chosen to represent the behavior
characteristics
of
each
constituent
32
member.
The equations of motion analytically describing the system are
then solved by a step-by-step procedure of the Newmark S method [311.

4.2 Basic Assumptions
In this section the basic assumptions used in the analysis of the
frame-wall structures are presented.
These basic assumptions are,
1.
Torsional effects are neglected.

to planar frame-wall systems.
2.
A substitute frame system is adopted to simplify and economize

in modeling a frame substructure.
3.
Every member in this substitute structure is represented as a

massless line member considered to act along its centroidal
axis.
4.
Geometric nonlinearities are assumed insignificant and are thus

neglected in the analysis.
5.
The structure is assumed to be fixed to a rigid

the base.
6.
The mass of the structure is assumed to be concentrated at

floor levels.
7.
Axial deformations of beam members, internal column members and

wall members are ignored.
8.
The shear
neglected.
9.
In the incremental force method the stiffness

of
each
constituent member of the structure is assumed constant within
the force interval. Residuals or overshoots are applied to the
next increment.
deformations
that
Thus the analysis is limited
occur
in
foundation
joint
core
at
the
are
4.3 Analytical Models

4.3.1 The Concentrated Spring Model
The concentrated spring model
is
cantilever
beam
with
the
33
addition
of
previously.
a rotational spring inserted at the fixed end as described

Instead
of
analyzing
this model, however, a simple beam
which is constructed with a flexible portion over the

member
and
analyzed.
formed
two
concentrated
interior
the
rotational springs placed at each end is
This replacement is possible because a
simple
beam
can
be
from a combination of two concentrated spring cantilever models.
The resulting simple beam model can be used extensively.

this
of
In
order
for
simple beam to be applied to frame-wall structures, rigid portions
have to be added at both ends as well.

beam
as
The configurations of
simple
well as a concentrated spring model are shown in Fig.4.1.
rotational springs take account of the beam end rotations
due
to
The
bond
slippage of the embeded reinforcing steel at the point A' in the Fig.4.1
as well as the normal inelastic flexural action over
The
flexibility
matrix
of
the
be
rotational
calculated
relating
the
length.
incremental
by
simply
adding
the
springs to those due to flexural and
shearing actions in the flexible element.

matrix
beam
for the simple beam which is combined with two
concentrated spring models, can

flexibilities
the
The
external
in~tantaneous
flexibility
moments to the incremental
rotations are expressed as:
(4.1)
where
68
A,
68
B= incremental
rotations at the ends A',
line element, respectively
fFl = the
instantaneous flexibility matrix
B'
of
flexural
34
6M
A,
6M
B = incremental
moments
applied
at
the
ends
A',B'
of
flexural line element, respectively

The instantaneous flexibility matrix appearing in Eq.(4.1) can be
expressed in the following form[18,42].
[F] =
[ f1
+ fU~ft),
f2
(4.2)
fl + f(M B)
f2
where
1
fl = 3E1 + akAG
(4.3)
kAG = shear rigidity, k is a shape factor for shear deformation

a
= 0.5,
= length
reduction fator (Sec.3.4.1)
EI = elastic
of the flexible element

flexural rigidity of
the
cross
section
of
the
flexible element
f(M A), f(M S) = the rotational flexibilities

inelastic
action
resulting
from
bond
slip,
the beam length,, at the ends A'
over
and E', respectively

An
instantaneous
stiffness
matrix can be obtained by inverting
the instantaneous flexibility matrix of Eq.(4.2), Thus
[K] = [F]-l = [;11 K12l

K21
(4.4)
K22
If axial deformation is also taken into account,
6MI
A
6M 1
6N '
Kll
K12
6e Al
K21
K22
L\e l
K33
6E'
(4.5)
35
Incremental forces b. MA' b. MB' b. N and the incremental
deformations
b.8 , b.8 , b.s , at the ends of the rigid portions are related to the
A
B
,
'
incremental forces b. MA' b. MB' b. N and the inremental deformations b.8 A'
b.8B' b.s
at the ends of the flexible
element
through
transformation
matrix T as,
W1A
flM'
flN
flN'
(4.6)
fl8'
fl8'
where
T
= the transpose of the matrix T
l+A
l+A
(4.7)
A is the ratio of the length of a rigid portion to that

element.
The
of
flexible
instantaneous moment-rotation relationship of the simple
beam with rigid portions at both ends
can
be
expressed
by
combining
Eqs . (4.4) , (4 .5) and (4.6),
fl8
flMA
T
flMB
flN
T- K-T
fl8
fls
A
B
(4.8)
36
The forces and the displacements of
the
simple
beam
model
local coordinates are related to the corresponding quantities in
in
global
coordinates by the transformation matrix C,
(Local)
(Global) (Global)
(Local)
(4.9)
where
setting L = (1 + 2A)
r
C =
i
1
l/L
l/L
-1
o
o
-l/L
o
, for hori zonta 1 members
-l/L
o
(4.10)
C:
-l/L
-ill
-1
o
o
l/L
l/L
for vertical members
37
where
( D.
A'
D.
v A' D.
A'
D.
u B'
!:,
v B' !J. w ~ an d (!J. P f{ D. V f{ !J. M f{ !J. P B' 6.
'B ' !J. M ~
are
the displacements and forces expressed in global coordinates as shown in

Fig.4.2.
By combining Eqs.(4.8),(4.9)
force-displacement
relationship
of
and
a
(4.10),
member
is
the
instantaneous
expressed in global
coordinates by:
(4.11)
where
(4.12)
is a member stiffness matrix in global coordinates The K
is
m
matrix is used to
described
in
Appendix
A.
This
member
stiffness
construct the structural stiffness matrix of the structure in the
usual
manner.
4.3.2 The Multiple Spring Model

The
several
multiple
subelements
spring
along
model
its
is
length.
considered
The
to be built up from
subelements
need
not
38
necessarily
be equal in length.
subelements
joined
together
The model looks like a single chain of
in
series
to
form
subelement may have different values of inelastic

on
the
level
or
magnitude
the
properties
are
depending
of forces to which it is subjected and on
properties of the member which the subelement models.

however
Each
member.
These
properties
assumed to be constant over the length of each subelement.
Any moment-curvature relation can be assigned
to
Figure
rigidities as well as the
4.3(b)
shows
the
assumed
flexural
each
short
segment.
moment distribution along the length of a cantilever beam.

The
method
of
analysis
with
this
model uses the flexibility
matrix of each subelement in conjunction with transfer matrices.

4.3(a)
shows
this
from left to right.

loads
applied
model in which the joints are numbered sequentially

Because, as used, the
only
multiple
to
spring
model
has
at story levels, that model is discussed here as a
cantilever beam subjected to forces applied only

subjected
Figure
at
the
tip
and
not
any external forces applied within the span length, L, of
the cantilever beam.

The
flexibility
matrix of the cantilever beam can be derived as
follows: According to Fig.4.3(a),
[FabJ
T
F..
2:E
, J b lJ Ejb
F,
F2
F3
F3 F4
where
[FabJ
flexibility matrix of the cantilever beam abo
F..
= flexibility matrix of the element ij.
Ejb
= transformation matrix of element jb.
lJ
(4.13)
39
and
EA.
~1
.1
3EI. + akGA.
1
1
~1
F .. =
lJ
(4.14)
- 2EI.
~1
- 2EI.
D.1
and
Ejb =
(4.15)
b
0
- L:
k=j
k
b
L
where
L:
k=l
(4.16)
L :: length of the cantilever beam

tk :: length of the k-th subelement of the cantilever beam
EA; ,kGA; ,EI; :: instantaneous
equivalent
axial"
shear,
and
flexural
rigidity of the i-th subelement of the cantilever beam

As t he external forces {P b \ are applied only at the
tip
of
the
cantilever, the displacements are obtained by the following equation
{U b} = [FabJ {P b}
Pb
{U b} =
Vb
8b
' {P b} =
Vb
Mb
(4.17)
40
where
{U }
b
= displacement
vector at the tip of the cantilever beam
{P } = applied force vector at the tip of the cantilever beam

b
In order to achieve an inelastic analysis of the cantilever beam,

incremental
member
end forces are applied in order to be able to trace
the behavior of material nonlinearity.
Thus
Eq.(4.17)
is
written
in
incrmental form
(4.18)
where
L6.U b} = incremental
displacement
vector
at
the
tip
of
the
vector
at
the
tip
of
the
cantilever beam
{llP b}
= incremental
applied
force
cantilever beam
[F abJ = incremental
flexibility matrix of the cantilever beam
In the application of this model to general structures, a

stiffness matrix has to be obtained.
This stiffness matrix [K
bb
member
] of the
cantilever beam is obtained by inverting the flexibility matrix[F ab J
[KbbJ = [FabJ-
The
stiffness
1 =
Kl
K2
K3
K3
K4
(4.19)
matrix of an individual member can be obtained as
follows:
[KabJ =
[EabKbbE~b
'
-KbbEab '
-EabKbb ]
(4.20)
Kbb
41
The member end forces are related to the member end displacements
through
the
member
stiffness
matrix
[~b
1 in the incremental form as
follows:
~Pa
~ua
~Va
~va
~Ma
~8
~Pb
[KabJ
(4.21)
~Ub
~Vb
~vb
~Mb
~8b
In the global coordinates, using transformation matrix c,

~PA
~UA
~VA
~vA
~MA
=~
~PB
~8A
~UB
~VB
~vB
~MB
~8B
Km = C Kab
(4.22)
(4.23)
where
for horizontal members
for vertical members

0
-1
C=
1 0
0 0
0
1
-
_1-
C=
0
0
0
_1-
1 0
-1
1 0
0 1
42
This
structural
member
stiffness
stiffness
matrix
matrix
of
the
Km is
used
structure
to
construct
again
in
the
the normal
fashion.
4.3.3 Layered Model

The layered model is a cantilever beam with a layered section
length
Lp
of
inelastic zone at the fixed end as described previously.
The layered model is used in the first story

frame
structure
concentrated
exterior
columns
of
the
in combination with the concentrated spring model.
is shown in Fig.4.4.
the
of
It
The analytical procedure is similar to the case of
spring
model.
The instantaneous flexibility matrix
corresponding to Eq.(4.2) is,
(4.24)
where
The counterflexure point is assumed to be at the

column length, the effect of inelastic action of
of f2 can
be
ignored.
The
member
stiffness
center
of
the
on the coupling term
matrix
obtained
from
Eqs.(4.4)-(4.12) is applied to the structural stiffness matrix.

4.4 Structural Stiffness Matrix
The
developed
structural
by
combining
stiffness
all
matrix
member
of
the
stiffness
frame-wall system is
matrices
into
story
43
stiffness
matrices
and
then condensing out a number of the degrees of
freedom so that only horizontal story movements appear in the final form
of the equations.
4.4.1 Story Stiffness Matrix

The i-th story stiffness matrix of the
frame-wall
structure
is
developed as follows:
r Kc1
0
Kc2
- - - - [K; ] =
Kc3
AT.
..!.
- - - -
.!.
:K b1
0
Kb2
-1-
(4.25)
-1-
I~
where
K . ,K . ,K
CJ bJ
are
the
column,
the
beam
and
the
wall
stiffness matrices in global coordinates as shown in Fig.4.5.

connectivity matrix and shown in appendix A.
member
A is
the
44
4.4.2 Assembled Stiffness Matrix
The full-size structural
stiffness
matrix
is
accomplished
the story stiffness matrices,

[K.},
in proper order.
.
1
summing
by
The force-
displacement relation of a structure is then expressed in the form.
FF
1
=
A,
R,
OF
A2
R2
RT
RT
-;;-) ,
-.- - -
(4.26)
where
{FF}' {OF} = force, displacement vector of frame term

{F }, {O } = force, displacement vector of wall term
W
W
{F }, {OH}
H
holizontal force, displacement vector
The details of Eq.(4.26) are described in Appendix A.

Only external lateral loads are considered in this
external
vertical
forces
and
moments
at
joints
study.
Thus
of a structure are
assumed to be zero.
0
FF
Fw
FH
Static
condensation
(4.27)
FH
of the vertical displacements and rotations
yields
{O H}
L
(4.28)
45
In incremental form this equation is rewrthis equationten as:
(4.29)
where
(4.30)
[K ] = the
reduced structural stiffness matrix of size, number of
H
stories by number of stories
Eq.(4.29) is solved for lateral displacements from a given set of
lateral load and a known instantaneous structural stiffness.
(4.31)
4.5 Static Analysis

The
frame-wall structure is analyzed under several increments of
load which may be either a monotonically increasing
load
or
cyclic
load.
Load increments are applied to each story level of the structure.
The
load
arbitrary.
change
distribution
over
the
height
of
the
during
the
loading
process.
behave
not
During each load increment, the

The
linearly.
structure's
stiffness
is reconstructed or reevaluated following each load increment in
accordance with the hysteresis rules for the concentrated

and
structure is
But it is assumed that the load distribution shape does
structure is assumed to
matrix
shape
the
multiple
spring
model
or
behavior of the material model selected

unbalance
in
spring
model
accordance with the nonlinear

for
the
layered
model.
Any
or excess force that developes within an increment is applied
46
as a load to the next increment.
This force correction procedure is
adaptation of the Initial Stress Method.

used,
the
load
an
As the iteration scheme is not
increment should be chosen to be small enough to avoid
significant residual forces.

4.6 Dynamic Analysis
A step-by-step numerical integration
(time-history)
procedure
is used to solve the equations of motion for the dynamic analysis of the
frame-wall structure.
number
of
small
The earthquake time history
time
incrments.
is
divided
The incremental response values are
obtained using the structural properties at the beginning

step.
into
of
the
time
The solution advances in a step-by-step manner using a series of
linear systems with changing stiffness properties.
4.6.1 The Equations of Motion

The equations of motion in terms of the relative displacements of
the mass points can be written in an incremental form as follows,
(4.32)
where
[M] = diagonal
[c]
= damping
story mass matrix

matrix
[K ] = structural
H
stiffness matrix which is evaluated at the end
of the previous time step

{~x},{~x},{~x}= relative
incremental
story acceleration, story velocity,
and story displacement vector, respectively

{~y}
= base
acceleration vector
47
4.6.2 Mass Matrix
The lumped mass concept is assumed in the analysis.
mass
All
of
the
of the structure is assumed to be concentrated at the story levels
of the structure.
elements.
Members or elements are considered as
Thus the
~ass
massless
line
ffi3trix is expressed as,
[M] =
(4.33)
where
[M] = a
diagonal mass matrix of order n by n
m. = lumped mass at each story

1
= number of story
The
dyna~ic
analysis
of
consistent
mass
system
generally
requires more cooputational effort than a lumped mass system does.
This
is because the lJoped mass matrix is diagonal, while the consistent mass
matrix
has
that the
mass
::a;,y off-diagonal terms (mass coupling).
r0~ a~
ana:y~:~
translat:ora:
1,:,;,1:
by
Another reason is
degrees of freedom can be eliminated from

static
~-(r~e5
condensation,
of freedom
are
whereas
included
in
all
a
lumped
rotational
consistent
and
mass
analysis~~~'.
4.6.3
Matrix
The
V1S20US
type
mathematical simplicity.
of
damping
is
used
in
this
The damping matrix is expressed
as
study
a
for
linear
combination of the stiffness and mass matrices.
(4.34)
48
where
[C] =
viscous damping matrix
C2 = the constant multipliers
C"
The constant multipliers C"C
are related to the
damping
ratio
for any mode k by,

(4.35)
where
Wk' = the circular frequency of the k-th mode
Ak = damping factor of the k-th mode

In
provide
a
a
direct
specified
Alternately,
it
=w
Then
C,
= 2\W
i-th
damping
C, and C may be chosen to
solution,
ratio
at
two
selected
frequencies.
is often more convenient to specify A = T for a given

k
on the basis of test data or field observations.
frequency
integration
and
(4.36)
[ C]
can
be
evaluated
from
Eq.(4.34).
A damping
matrix
proportional to just the stiffness matrix is used in this study.

(4.37)
It
is
effective
in
reducing
the
components in the structure's response[42].
amount
of
high
frequency
49
[KHJ
The initial stiffness matrix denoted by

in
the
analysis.
in Eq.(4.37) is used
This means that the damping matrix remains unchanged
during any inelastic structural response.
Overestimations due to
usage
of the initial stiffness matrix is acceptable because the damping effect

should be expected
to
become
larger
when
any
inelastic
action
is
occurring in the structure.
4.6.4 Numerical Solution of Equations of Motion

Assuming
that
the
properties
of
the
structure do not change
within two time steps, the equations of motion(Eq.4.32)

numerically
by
an
explicit
or
an implicit method.
can
be
solved
In this study an
implicit method is used since the bandwidth of the stiffness
matrix
is
small and an iteration procedure is not needed.

Applying the implicit form of the Newmark
incremental
acceleration
method[31],
the
{6X} and the incremental velocity {.t&} can be
expressed in terms of the incremental displacement
..
Beta
{~}
and
quantities,
..
{X}, and {X} at the end of the previous time step.

1
2S
{D.x}
{e}
X
,
e
2 {D.x} - SD. t {x}
(1
4S - 1) uAt {'x'}
2'S {x}
(4.38)
(4.39)
S(llt)
where
t
= time
interval
S = a constant which indicates the variation of acceleration

in a time interval (s =1/4 is chosen).
{x} = relative story velocity vector at the end of the

time step
previous
50
= relative
{x}
story acceleration
vector
at
the
end
of
the
Eq.(4.32),
the
previous time step

Substituting
Eqs.(4.38)
into
(4.39)
~d
incremental story displacement vector can be obtained as
= {B}
{~x}
[A]
(4.40)
(4.41)
where
= the
{~x}
[A] = [~J
B~t
2B~t [C]
[M] +
is
{2~
[M]
~t(~s -
solve~
vector
~ [M]
5~t
a~e
t'
dynamic loaj
as the
(B) = {
[AJ,:
be
incremental story displacement vector
~a~r:x
ha~
calculated
calculated
defined
Once
the
the
obtained,the
fr~~ Q.(~.38).
froo
1) [C]} {x} -
[M]{~Y}
dynamic
(4.43)
stiffness matrix and the

The
equations
can
elimination or other decomposition procedure such
=ethod.
C~e~
as
{x}
of the structure, respectively.
by ~3~s~lan
Cho:es~~
[C]}
(4.42)
incremental
incremental
relative
relative
The incremental relative
Eq.(4.32)
displacement
velocities
are
accelerations
are
based on the current structural properties,
[c] and [KHJ.
{~x} = - [M]-l ~C]{~X}
[KR]{~X}
[M]{~Y~
(4.44)
51
The
acceleration
stiffness
properties
response
of
instead of Eq.(4.39) is
accelerations.
More
the
used
is
Therefore
structure.
to
calculate
the
Equation
incremental
(4.44)
relative
accurate results can be obtained by computing the
incremental accelerations based on

rather
very sensitive to changes in the
the
than the previous ones[41].
updated
structural
properties
The structural story displacements,
joint rotations and so forth at the end of the time increment are
to
the
equal
response quantities at the beginning of the time increment plus
the calculated changes in the response quantities.

In the numerical solution of the equations of motion, the cost of
an analysis relates directly to the size of the time step which
has
to
be used for stability and accuracy[50].

Bathe[81
period
investigated
elongation
in
the
stability
dynamic
limits,
response
amplitude
based
on
decay
and
simple linear
systems.
Weeks[48] concluded that the characteristics of operators such as
~
Newmark's
essentially
method
or
unchanged
Wilson's
from
the
method
linear
[31,501,
carryover
to the nonlinear case if time
increments small enough to adequately trace the response are used and if
equilibrium is satisfied at each step.
McNamara~28]
analysis
does
not
recommended that even though the nature of nonlinear

lend
itself
easily to rigid conclusions, the time
increment of the solution must be relatively small
and
certainly
less
than 1/100 to 1/200 of the solution period.

Furthermore, from another aspect it
should
be
noted
that
the
higher frequencies of a lumped parameter system are always in error when
52
compared to the continuous problem.
It should also be noted that as the
earthquake excitation components with periods smaller

sec.
generally
are
not
accurately
recorded,
than
there
about
0.05
is very little
justification to include the response in these higher frequencies in the

analysi s.
Therefore
in
the nonlinear analysis of complex structures,
many high frequency modes do not contribute appreciably to the response.

With
S =1/4
is
these sugestions described above, the Newmark's method with

chosen
unconditionably
~t=0.0004
with
stable
sec.
constant
corresponds to
fundamental
in
this
study.
in
linear
updated
is
applications.
known
instantaneous structural stiffness
[KHJ.
=1/500,
period
of
~t/T2=1/140,
the
stiffness
~t/T3=1/70
structure
and
~t=0.004,
so
the
to
be
Asa time increment

equations
~t/T1
member
method
is chosen for the analysis of the
increments, which corresponds to

structural
This
on.
of
motion
This time step
where
T1
is
the
In every ten time
constant
instantaneous
is replaced by an updated one calculated from the
stiffnesses.
This
numerical
technique
allows
an
acceptable and econonical solution.
4.6.5 Residual Forces

During
overshoot
the
may
relatjonships
response
result
calculation
because
of
the
of the equations of motion an

assumed
used for the structural elements.
moment-curvature
The excess moments are
detected at each element level by comparing the calculated

the
loop.
equations
of
motion
moment
from
with the moment obtained from the hysteresis
A numerical iteration procedure for the overshooting forces, when
yielding
occurs
within the time interval, is not applied in this study
53
since it needs more computation time and a
numerical
iteration
within
the time interval does not always yield a true solution for the case
dynamic
problems
anyway.
Therefore
moment at the joint at element level.

is applied to the subsequent time step.
of
a correction is made only in the

The residual moment at each joint
54
CHAPTER 5
HYSTERESIS RULES AND NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
When using either the concentrated spring model or
spring
multiple
model, hysteresis rules have to be created in order to trace the
inelastic behavior of these models.

this
the
study.
The
Takeda[44J.
which
first
hysteresis
model
account
beam-column joints.
of
of
is
that proposed by
the pinching action and bond deterioration in
The second hysteresis model is applied to the
this structure.
of
experimental
beam
This is only necessary in the case of very
large excitatjon from the earthquake motions.

results
used
The second hysteresis model used is a modified Takeda model
takes
members
Two hysteresis rules are adopted in
studies
of
This is observed from the
reinforced
concrete beam-column
joints under large load reversals[25J.

5.2 Degrading Trilinear Hysteresis Rule.
5.2.1 Hysteresis Model l
The degrading trilinear hysteresis rule of the Takeda model is in
common usage to represent the inelastic behavior of reinforced
members.
With
this
model
the
moment-rotation
concrete
relationship
of
cantilever flexural element is defined as shown in Fig.5.1.

A trilinear primary curve is defined by three points: a concrete
cracking point, a steel yielding point, and a concrete
This
primary
curve
rule
changes
its
ultimate
is assumed to be symmetric about its origin.

unloading
stiffness
according
to
the
point.
This
following
55
mathematical expression.
(5.1)
where
Ku = new
unloading stiffness
Ko = primary
= yield
0y
stiffness of hysteresis rule
deflection
Om = maximum deflection attained
in
the
of
direction
the
loading
a = constant (0.5 is used in this study)

The reloading curve basically aims at the previous maximum
on
the
primary
curve in that direction.
model 1 is used to define

rotation
spring
of
the
concentrated
moment-curvature relationship of each

The
model.
hysteresis
In this study the hysteresis
moment - rotation
the
point
spring
relationship
spring
of
model
the
of
the
and
multiple
the
spring
model 1 is applicable to those cases where the
member fails in a dominantly
flexure
mode.
Shear
failure,
pinching
action or bond deterioration are not considered in this hysteresis rule.

5.2.2 Hysteresis model
Hysteresis
model
1 had to be modified in order to deal wjth the
effect of pinching action and bond deterioration
that
appears
in
the
behavior of beam-column joints under large load reversals.

Through analytical models, Lybas[27] investigated
of
slip
of
the
reinforcement
shear wall structure.
But here
the
mechanism
in the beam-pier joint for the coupled

the
mathematical
hysteresis
created just from the results of experimental observation[25].
rule
is
56
Hysteresis model
is
defined
as
follows(Fig.5.2).
maximum rotation(displacement) never exceeds the

hysteresis
rule
is
exactly
yielding
the
points,
the
the same as hysteresis model 1.
maximum rotation (displacement) goes beyond the yield

the
If
point,
Once the
then
for
next one-half cycle during unloading and reloading, moment-rotation
relations behave according to an assumed cubic function (Fig.5.2).
(5.2)
where
=
0 =
DO =
M
moment variable
displacement variable
displacement value on the x coordinate which
is
obtained
by using the slope of Ku in Eq. (5. 1 )
a
The
coefficient
coefficient "a" of the cubic function Eq.(5.2) can be determined by
requiring that this function passes through the known points

B(Do,O), and
the assumed point E(-D,,-M,).
point
A,
model
2.
loop
3
3
Key points of this model are C(O, -aDo) and D(-D 0' - 2aD o )
in addition to the points A, Band E.

reloading
as
In lieu of this function a simplification made up
of three straight lines : AB, BD and DE, is used as the hysteresis

of
),
The position of the point E
is assumed symmetric about the origin with respect to the

indicated in Fig.5.2.
A(~ ,~
occur
If unloading and
the
subsequent
at some point, say a point F, whose position is still
of the same sign in displacement as the previous maximum unloading point

A,
then
the
hysteresis
behavior is assumed to follow along a line FG
whose slope is Ku and then a line GA which aims at the maximum
point
57
directly.
F'
If unloading and the subsequent reloading occur from a point
whose
position
is
now
of
opposite sign in displacement from the
previous maximum unloading point A, then

along
hysteresis
rules
follow
a line F'G' whose slope is K and follows the cubic function rule
U
from the point G' to the point A.

obtained
from
the
In this case the coefficient
the
current
"a"
is
assumption that Eq.(5.2) passes through the assumed
negative maximum point E, G' and A.

are
the
maximum
The points A(D"Ml) and
positive
and
negative
E(-D,,-Ml)
displacement points
experienced by the member during all previous cycles respectively.

Using
the
hysteresis
numerical computations
are
model 2 in the concentrated spring model,

performed
relationship of a cantilever beam.

152.4 MM.
to
obtain
the
The assumed specimen has a length of
and a rectangular cross section of (38 MM.
2-3No.13G wire as reinforcing.
structure
FW-2
listed in Table 5.2.

is
applied
to
(Table
6.2).
The
hysteresis
model
MM.)
with
exterior
beams
At first, regularly increasing five cycle
the free end of the cantilever beam.

the
loading
Second, irregular
beam.
Computed
relationships for both cases are shown in Fig.5.3.

2
can
numerically
of
stiffness characteristics are
eight cycle loading is applied to the free end of

moment-rotation
x 38
The assumed material and cross sectional
properties are similar to those of the middle level

the
moment-rotation
produce
the
pinching
The
action
(including the effect of bar pull-out due to bond deterioration) in both

cases.
58
5
5.3 Comparison of Computed Hysteresis Loops with Experimental Results

5.3.1 Force-Displacement Relationship of
are
The
three
applied
to
mechanical
a
force-displacement
length of 686 MM.
MM.)
for
deep
the
(wall)
beam
wall.
and a rectangular cross section of
with 2-2No.2G wire as reinforcing.
used in the concentrated spring model and

force-displacement
The
and
(c).
the
curves
to
representing
the
the
reinforced
MM.
203
computed
stiffness
multiple
for
the
spring
free
values[2]
end
as
model.
of
shown
the
in
The primary intent of this comparison is to
obtain a basic feeling for the applicability

models
(38
The hysteresis model 1 is
cantilever beam are compared with experimental

Figs.5.4(a),(b),
the
The assumed material and cross
characteristics are also listed in Table 5.3.
computed
trace
to
The assumed specimen has a
sectional properties are listed in Table 5.3.
The
Deep Beam
models described in the previous chapters
cantilever
curves
concrete
force-displacement
of
the
cantilever
relations
three
beam
of
in
that
mechanical
so
far
beam.
as
The
agreement between the computed values from each mechanical model and the
experimentally obtained results is seen.
5.3.2 Force-Displacement Relationship of
The two hysteresis models just
discussed
Beam-Column Joint
are
compared
experimental results obtained for a beam-column joint.

performed for multi-cycles of loading.
characteristics
used
the
These tests were
The assumed data on the material
in the analysis of the beam-column joint is taken
from the FW-2 structure.

Table 5.2.
to
~or
convenience this data
is
retabulated
in
The comparison is illustrated in Fig.5.4, showing variations
59
of
top
lateral
loading
force
versus
top
experimental results are represented by the

shows
that
hysteresis
experimental results.
conducted
in
model
But
it
fits
should
level
deflection.
broken
quite
be
line.
that
the range of very large deformations.
response
is
limited
to
5.5
with
the
test
was
the
Although it is not
illustrated, hysteresis model 1 also is effective as long as

of
Figure
effectively
noted
The
the
range
that of small deformations of beam-column
joints.
5.4 Effect Q[ Axial Load
A reinforced
flexural
concrete
section
typically
is
weakened
in
its
when it is also under the influence of axial tension.
stre~gth
Yielding of the tensile reinforcement limits its flexural strength.

the
other
hand
moderate
axial
compression
On
has a positive effect on
moment capac1ty:7,20,40].
For
be~ ~embers
For the wall

also
zero
load.
~ver
Thi~
column 15
motion.
column
m~mbe~~
1!
simplicity It
the
r~n:ally
The curv~!
vary
it is reasonable to assume that the axial force
~hough
~',Jt~@"'tf"j
earthquake
is
the wall members are subjected to their own dead

a very small value.
For the column members each
to an axial load which changes during the earthquake

or the moment-curvature
j~~~~!lng
l!
it can be assumed that the axial force is zero.
upon its axial force.
a!!umed that the axial force

mQ~ion.
relations
for
each
story
However, for the sake of

remains
constant
during
Furthermore the structure is divided into three
zones of constant values for
the
axial
force.
This
subdivision
is
accomplished based on judgement assigning each story column to the group
60
with axial force near its
dead
load.
This
assignment
is
shown
in
Fig.5.6.
The
effect
of axial load on inelastic behavior of the structure
was also investigated by using the layered

story
exterior columns.
Chapter 6.
model
to
model
the
first
The computed results achieved are presented in
61
CHAPTER 6
COMPUTED RESULTS
To demonstrate the applicability and flexibility of the
models,
series
of
numerical
examples are presented.
presented in this study are of two types, the structure

wall
The examples
with
strong
referred to as FW-1 and the structure with a weak wall referred to
as FW-2.
is
proposed
The main difference between the strong wall and the weak
the
amount
of
steel reinforcement used in the wall.
The vertical
reinforcement is concentrated in two small bundles located in the

two
edges
of
the
wall
as
shown
in Fig.2.2.
analyses
are
first made.
outer
In order to study the
behavioral characteristics of the frame-wall structures FW-1

static
wall
and
FW-2,
Following these preliminary studies,
dynamic analyses are made for these structures subjecting
them
to
the
first three seconds of the base accelerations obtained from experimental

tests[2J.
load
on
A third investigation into the effect of changing

the
first story exterior columns is also made.
examples thus computed are listed in Table 6.1.
The
the
axial
The numerical
computed
results
are compared with experimental results obtained by Abrams[2J.

Material properties assumed for the models are
6.2.
The
in
Table
cross-sectional properties of the constituent members of the
models are shown in Figs.2.1 and 2.2.

are
listed
listed in Table 6.3.
The configurations of the
models
The stiffness properties of these constituent
members are calculated by the procedures described in Chapter 3.
These
62
calculated
stiffness properties are listed in Table 6.4.
The structure
type FW-2 is the main specimen to be investigated in this study.

6.2 Static Analysis
It
is assumed that both structures are subjected to a first-mode
(triangular) loading because the first mode

major
is
considered
to
be
the
contributor to the response that would occur under dynamic loads.
The static load is applied to the structures: FW-1 and

increments
FW-2,
in
small
with the same distribution pattern of triangular load shape.
The load increment used in this investigation is selected as 1/50 of the

maximum
anticipated
t~p
corresponds to
6.2.1
Curves
calculated
static
base
shear of 24.5 KN..
Shear-Top Story Displacement Relationship
FW-'
base
and
shear
versus
tenth-level
FW-2 are shown in Fig.6.1.
displacement
A curve for FW-1
neglecting the steel bar slip effect in the beam-column joints

shown
in
that
rlg~re.
for
case~.
beams is
the
jnitlate~
wall
at
tne
also
Cracking starts at about the same loading levels

For the FW-1 strucrure, the first yielding of the
at a base shear of 14.5 KN.

ba~e.
followed by yielding
of
After yielding at the base of the wall, (at a
base shear or 18.' [N.), a marked change

occurs.
is
The overall behavior of these structures can be
r!g~re.
seen from thlS

all three
This
lateral load of 4.45 KN .. )
depicting
ror
load(max.
in
the
structural
stiffness
The structure, however, maintains its resisting system against
further load increase due to the

hysteresis.
Neglecting
steel
strain
bar
slip
hardening
in
the
assumption
beam-column
in
the
joints
63
produces a stiffer curve as expected.
For the FW-2 structure, the
yields first (at a base shear of 10.3 KN.)

(at
base
shear
of
12.3
KN.).
wall
followed by the beam members
An elastic curve is also shown in
Fig.6.1 for comparison purposes with the three other curves.
6.2.2 Moment
Distribu~ion
Patterns
Moment distribution patterns in all members of FW-2 are shown

Fig.6.2
for
the load level initiating yielding at the column base(at a
base shear of 14.7 KN.).

where
the
structure
The two patterns shown are for first the
rigidity
of
the
the
change
due
to
reduced
wall member allows the upper portion of the
wall to keep more flexural moment whereas the lower portion of the
retains
case
remained elastic and then for the inelastic case.
Comparison of the two patterns shows that

flexural
in
wall
lesser flexural moment as compared with that from an elastic
analysis.
The point of contraflexure of the wall shifts downward in the
inelastic
moment
distribution
pattern.
Except for the first and the
second level columns, the point of contraflexure is seen to remain
near
the center of the member.
6.2.3 Redistribution Q[ Base Shear between

A redistribution
of
Wall
Columns.
base shear occurs between the wall and the
various columns as the load increases on structures FW-1 and FW-2.

results
of
distribution
the
of
characteristics
investigation
base
of
shear
are
varies
shown
in
depending
Figs.6.3
upon
and 6.4.
the
The
The
nonlinear
the constituent members during the loading process.
In the elastic stage of the FW-1 structure, the wall is subjected to
84
64
per
is
cent of the base shear.
When cracking in the wall is initiated and
followed in the beams and columns, the wall's share declines from 84
per cent to 79 per

contribution
to
cent
of
the
base
shear.
Initially
the
wall's
the base shear is almost constant and more than 80 per
cent of all the shear until the wall
yields
at
the
base.
Following
yielding at the base in the wall, a rapid shift of the base shear in the
wall to that in the column members occurs
until
those
column
members
reach yield at the base.

In the FW-2 structure, the wall is subjected to 7'8
the
base
shear in the elastic stage.
per
cent
Then part of that shear from the
wall is transferred to the column members when cracking is initiated

wall.
Distribution
of
in
base shear in the wall changes from the 78 per
cent of the elastic stage to 68 per cent when the

base.
of
wall
yields
at
the
There is then an accelerated decline down to 32 per cent at which
time the base

transfers
its
of
columns
yield.
The
wall
of
the
FW-2
structure
shear gradually to the column members during the loading
process.
6.2.4 Collapse Mechanism

The sequence of formation of the collapse mechanisms for FW-1 and
FW-2
is
load.
bending
presented in Figs.6.5 and 6.6 for the monotonically increasing
A triangular
moment
lateral
exceeds
the
load
distribution
yield
moment
constituent member, a yield hinge is assigned
is
assumed.
When
capacity at the end of any

to
that
end.
This
is
shown as darkened zones in Figs.6.5 and 6.6.

In the FW-1 structure with
its
strong
wall,
the
first
yield
65
hinges
(60
appear at the end of the 4-th level beams.
This occurs at 30/50
per cent) of the assumed maximum lateral load(max.
KN.).
base shear 24.5
Then yield hinges form sequentially in the beams toward the upper
levels
of
the structure.
After the formation of the 6-th set of yield
hinges in the beam members, the segment nearest the

starts
yielding
from the base portion.
wall does not propagate significantly.

beam members also yield.
base
of
of
the
assumed
wall
However, the yield zone of the

At the same time
the
remaining
The final failure of the structure occurs when
the first story columns yielded at the base at a load of 41/50

cent)
the
maximum
(82
per
= 24.5
load(assumed maximum base shear
KN.).
In the FW-2 structure with its weak wall, the segment of the wall
nearest the base starts yielding first at a load of 21/50 (42 per
of
the
assumed
maximum
load.
Then various beam members form hinges.
Yielding of the beams begins at the

further
into
cent)
intermediate
the lower and upper levels.
levels
and
proceeds
Finally when the first story
column members yield at the base at 30/50 (60 per cent) of

maximum load(24.5 KN.), the structure forms a mechanism.
the
assumed
The yield zone
in the wall has propagated to a higher portion of the wall than was
the
case for FW-1.
6.2.5 Comparison of
Structure FW-1 and FW-2
The structure FW-1 with its strong wall, yielded at a higher load
and has the higher ultimate strength, as to be expected, compared to the
FW-2
structure(Fig.6.1).
Base
shear-top
story
displacement of FW-1
approaches more nearly an elastic-plastic diagram whereas that
of
FW-2
66
draws
a more curved shape.
In FW-1, the behavior of the wall dominates
markedly the overall behavior of the structure.

true.
After the
collapse
structure
does
not
increases
because
hysteresis rule.
mechanism
has
been
In FW-2, this is not so

formed,
however,
the
lose its resisting capability against further load

of
the
assumption
of
strain
hardening
in
the
As seen in Fig.6.5 and 6.6, the yield zone in the weak
wall is more fully developed than that of a strong wall.

6.3 Dynamic Analysis
Next nonlinear dynamic response analyses for the
and
for
the FW-2 structure were made.
levels
These cases are for
method
is
described
in Chapter 4.
FW-2.
The
A summary of numerical
examples including the assumed analytical conditions is listed in

6.1.
The
two
of accelerations for FW-1 and two different levels of
accelerations and one variation on the hysteresis model for

analytical
structure
A total of five different cases
of response-history analyses were carried out.

different
FW-1
purpose
herein
is
Table
to investigate analytically the general
response phenomenon of a reinforced concrete frame-wall structure.
6.3.1 Base Motion

The base acceleration records used for the analysis in this study
are
those
base
motions
earthquake simulator.
the
experimental
of
2.5
and
in
the
structures
tested
on the
The original waveforms of input base motions
tests
(1940) NS component.
measured
are
for
the acceleration signals of the EI Centro
The original time axis is compressed by
factor
the amplitudes of acceleration are modified depending upon
67
the purpose of the model tests[2].

important factor.
motions
are
The duration of the earthquake is an
However only the first 3.0 seconds of
used in this study.
recorded
This is justified because the maximum
responses and most of the damage to the structures are expected to

place
within
those
3.0 seconds.
motions as well as those
of
base
the
take
The waveforms of these observed base

digitalized
response calculation are shown in Fig.6.7.
input
base
motion
for
The maximum accelerations of
the base motions used for each analysis are listed in Table 6.1.
6.3.2 Modal Properties
QL~
Structures
Modal properties associated with the first three vibration

of
FW-1
and
FW-2
are
computed
before
and
after
properties are listed in Table 6.5 and are also shown

6.9.
The
similar.
dynamic
mode
shapes
The mode shapes

tests.
Because
earthquake
motions,
run-3(max.
acc.=
the
2.41G)
modes
the runs.
in
These
Figs.6.8
and
of both the FW-1 and FW-2 structures are quite

are
not
significantly
changed
during
the
of the structural damage occurring during the

fundamental
for
FW-1
frequency
to
50
per
cent
fundamental value and reduced to less than 40 per cent

fundamental frequency after run-2(max.
reduced
is
after
of its initial
of
the
initial
acc.=0.92G) for FW-2.
6.3.3 Calculated Response

The
numerical
integration of the equations of motion is carried
out with the time increment of 0.0004 seconds (Newmark

values
are
recorded
every 0.004 seconds).
at
=1/4).
Response
every 10 numerical time integration points(at
The calculated response
waveforms
are
compared
68
with
the
Selected
observed
response waveforms for each structure for each run.
results
for
run-1
on
FW-1
with
for
maximum
Maximum
acceleration of O.49G are shown in Fig.6.10.

values
these cases are listed in Table 6.6.
input
output
base
response
The results for run-3
on FW-1 with a maximum input base acceleration of
2.41G
are
shown
in
Fig.6.11.
For FW-1 run-1, the agreement obtained between computed waveforms
and
the observed experimental ones is seen to be quite close on each of
the
response
waveforms
accelerations,
of
story
displacements
and
shears,
base
overturning
shear forces on walls.
moment,
But a slight
elongation of the fundamental period is observed in this comparison.

For
FW-1
run-3,
similar
reasonable
agreement
between
analytical and the experimental results can be seen in Fig.6.11.

agreements
exist
the
These
even though a rather strong earthquake with a maximum
base acceleration of
2.41G
has
been
used.
The
elongation
of
the
fundamental period is not observed in this comparison.

The results for FW-2 run-1 with maximum input
of
O.49G
and
for
FW-2
between
In
both
cases
does
trend
base
of
some
The
analytical
The response waveforms of displacements, shears
overturning
first mode component.

effect
agreement
to produce smaller response values than observed in
the experimental tests.

and
the
the computed and experimental waveforms is excellent.
No period elongation can be seen in these cases either.

scheme
acceleration
run-2 with maximum input base acceleration of
O.92G are shown in Figs.6.12 and 6.13.

existing
base
moment are relatively smooth and governed by the

The response waveforms of acceleration
higher
mode
components.
The
show
the
agreement between the
69
experimental and the calculated curves is satisfactory.
The
analytical
method can estimate the acceleration, the displacement,
the
shear
the
overturning
increment
moment
regardless
in
of
each
both
story
the
and
of the structure at each time
base
input
and
values
wall
characteristics in the structure.
6.3.4 Effects of the Pinching Action QL the Beam-Column Joints

The
pinching
action, including the slipping effect of the steel
bars due to bond deterioration described in

appears
in
the
of
the
of
pinching
lower
amplitude
in
Chapter
due
to
load
cycles.
These
The
hysteresis
model
is assigned to the beam member springs in the
beam-column joints of FW-2

sensitivity
experimentally
action on the maximum responses and response
waveforms of the structure are investigated.

described
5,
characteristics of beam-column joints under large load
reversals or after a number

effects
Chapter
for
run-2.
There
appears
to
be
pinching action in the response analysis.
little
This is
because the behavior of the wall dominates the behavior of the structure
and
the
wall
behaves
without
pinching
action.
Pinching action of
beam-column joints produces slightly larger displacements

smaller
accelerations,
response of FW-2 run-2.

with
and
without
shear
forces
and
overturning
and
slightly
moments in the
A detailed comparison of maximum response
pinching
action
structure can be seen in Table 6.6.
in
The
the
data
beam-column joints of the
response
waveforms
with those without pinching action are also shown in Fig.6.14.
compared
70
6.3.5 Moment-Rotation Relationship fQL the Flexural Spring
flexural spring of a beam is studied.

is
level.
the
one
at
the
in
the
value
of
The flexural spring selected
for
left end of the exterior beam at the fifth
The elastic deformation
included
response-history of the moment-rotation relationship for the
The
study
of
occurring
rotation.
along
the
beam
length
is
Results for four test runs(FW-1
run-1 and run-3, FW-2 run-1 and
run-2)
flexural
experiences two yield excursions on the
spring
of
the
beam
negative side for FW-1 run-1(max.

(max.
input
acc.=O.49G)
input
whereas
the
are
shown
in
Fig.6.15.
acc.=O.55G) and
flexural
FW-2
spring
of
experiences yielding in both directions for FW-1 run-3 and

Once
beyond
The
run-1
the beam
FW-2
run-2.
yielding, the spring stiffness is reduced in proportion to
the yielding value for all cases.
Note the area enclosed by
the
curve
represents the energy dissipation.

The large difference in the appearance of the
for
springs
(FW-2 run-2).
of
pinc~ing
with
and
is
curves
without pinching action can be seen in Fig.6.16
Large rotation of the spring is seen

action
hysteresis
included.
characteristics of the hysteresis
Although
curves
when
this
exists,
consideration
difference
its
effect
in the
on
the
overall behavior is minimal as noted in section 6.3.4.
6.3.6 Moment-Rotation Relationship Q[
Spring
of
relationship
of
Flexural
Column
The response-history of the
flexural
Fig.6.17.
spring
at
the
base
moment-rotation
of the left exterior column is shown in
Only the spring for FW-1 run-3 experiences yielding and
that
71
only
on
the
negative
The
side.
remaining
three
cases experience
cracking but no yielding on either side.
6.3.7 Moment-Curvature Relationship of
s Wall Segment
The response-history of the moment-curvature relationship for the

base of the wall segment is shown in Fig.6.18.
yield
Only a limited number of
excursions are seen with these occurring both sides.
The reduced
stiffness of the wall of FW-1 remains stiffer than that of the
wall
of
FW-2 throughout the test.
6.3.8
The
base
Moment-Top Story Displacement Relationship

moment-top
structures are shown

history
in
story
displacement
The
Fig.6.19.
relationships of both
overall
structural
the dynamic motion is seen in these figures.
durin~
of the stiffness of each structure is seen in all cases because

effect
of
narrower
lr.elastic action in the constituent members.
or
Wljt~
response
Softening
of
the
The relatively
loop in the FW-1 run-1 can be seen compared with
FW-2
runs' anj 2.
6.3.9
~e:;~~~e
Re~po~~e
column
are
Fig.6.20.
Waveforms
Q[~
Axial Force
Qt~
waveforms of the axial force at the
r~~~rded
during
the
earthquake
base
spring
model
for
that
column
component dominates these response waveforms.
of
the
the
left
motions and are shown in
These response waveforms are obtained with
concentrated
Column at
member.
the
use
of
the
The first mode
The load axis is seen
to
72
be
shifted
force
by the dead load of 5.5 KN.
varies
within an envelope bounded by a maximum compression force
of about 15 KN.
have
formed
At the base the column's axial
This is the value at which the beams from
yield hinges.
every
level
The lower bound is a minimum force(tension)
of about -2.0 KN.
6.3.10 Structural Yield Patterns

Inelastic hinge locations calculated during the
motions
are
earthquake
base
illustrated in Fig.6.21 for four cases( FW-1 runs 1 and 3,
FW-2 runs 1 and 2).
The
sequences
yielding
the
constituent members of the structure are also
occurs
in
of
yielding
and
the
time
when
shown in these figures.

The
columns
of
these
structures
runs(FW-1 run-1, FW-2 runs 1 and 2).
do
not yield throughout the
However for FW-1 run-3(max.
input
base acc.=2.41G), yield action was initiated at the base of the columns.
By contrast yielding hinges are distributed fairly uniformly at the ends
of
the
beams throughout almost all of the levels.
This is because the
structure is designed with weak beams and strong columns.

For
FW-2 run-2(max.
input base acc.=0.49G), all the yielding of
the various members is initiated within the first 0.9 seconds.

rest
of
the
cases(FW-1 runs
during the first 2.0 seconds.
For
the
and 3, FW-2 run-1), all yielding occurs

Inelastic action of the wall can be
seen
to propagate some from the base toward the upper segments.

For the FW-1 run-3(max.
forms
collapse
mechanism
time t=1.421 seconds.
input base
acc.=2.41G),
the
structure
when the first story columns yield at the
Also the wall at the base is severly
damaged
by
73
this
time.
yielding.
The whole portion of the first story wall can be seen to be

All
columns but the ones belonging to the first story prove
to be strong enough to avoid any significant yielding.

still
capable
of
sustaining
the
structural system because of the

hysteresis
rule
additional
assumption
The structure is
forces
of
the
applied
strain
in each model as seen in the static case.
experimentally observed cracking patterns of
FW-2
run-2
to the
hardening
Finally the
is
presented
from reference, [2] in Fig.6.22.

6.4 Effect Qf Changing Axial Load
It
is
important
to
check
induced by the earthquake motion.

exterior
columns
axial
loads
of slender structures.
system
when
forces and axial deformations are included.
on
the
the
variation
of
The layered model is

change
in
the
axial
the bending moment resisting mechanism of the column members.
This is done for both

single
of the column members
The exterior columns can play
used herein to study in a quantitative sense the

force
Exterior Columns
These loads might be critical in
an important role in the behavior of a

axial
the Base of
cycle loading.
monotonically
increasing
loading
and
for
the
The layered model is applied to both first story
exterior column members of the structure.
The concentrated spring model
is used for the remaining frame members and the multiple spring model is
used for wall members.
moment
resisting
simulated.
shaped
The general trends of
mechanism
at
the
base
the
axial
of the exterior columns are
The change in the axial rigidity is neglected.
static
lateral
load
is applied to the structure.
process applied is the same as was the
case
force-bending
for
the
A triangular
The loading
static
analysis
74
described
earlier.
incorporated
in
The
the
secondary p-
analysis.
throughly investigate the

dynamic
response
the
Effect
Q[
of the axial load is not
It is not the intent of this study to
influence
of
~effect
system
of
but
changing
merely
axial
load
on
the
its significance in the
present case.
6.4.1
Changing
Axial
Force
under
Monotonically
Increasing Lateral Load.

effect
The
of
changing
the
axial
force
in
the first story
exterior columns is studied first for the increasing lateral load.

The
base
shear-top
story
structure FW-2 is shown in Fig.6.23.
displacement
The
relationship
curves
of
of
the
displacement
are
obtained by using the layered model (solid line) as well as by using the
concentrated spring model (dotted line).
identical
primarily
exterior first
that
the
center and
On
the
columns.
~tory
curves
almost
layered model is applied only to the
The curve using the layered
model
shows
rlgh~
columns do not yield at all during the loading process.
other
yields
are
column
The
point and at a later stage than the layered model.
sa~~
m~me~t-curvature
curves
actual smooth
at the base at an early stage while the
nand the columns using the concentrated spring model all
ar~
the layered moje:
The
the
two
lert
yield at the
load
because
The
fon:
curve~
hysteresis
hysteresis loops of the layered section in
shown in Fig.6.24.
the
backbone hysteresis loops.
rather than
loops
Various applied constant axial
determined
idealized
They are made up of
piecewise
straight
lines.
with layered sections at the base of
both exterior columns are plotted in the figure.
The
hysteresis
loops
75
of
the
layered
constant
section
shift
from one moment-curvature curve with a
axial force to another moment-curvature curve with a different
constant axial force in order to reflect change in axial force.

hysteresis
loop
with
increasing
slope than that used in the

concentrated
spring
force of 4.45 KN.

the
On
the
axial force in the column, a stiffer
concentrated
spring
model
results.
The
model's primary curve is based on a constant axial
On a hysteresis loop with decreasing axial
force
in
column, the slope of the hysteresis loop is softer than that of the
primary curve and furthermore the slope of the

after
yielding
approximately
stiffer and softer curves.

stiffness,
this
computational
is
negative
as
the
mean
curve
between
the
When the layered section takes on a negative
replaced
ease
becomes
The concentrated spring model's primary curve
occurs.
then positions itself
curve
during
by
slight
positive
stiffness
the analysis of the structure.
numerical error is introduced in the analysis of
the
for
Therefore a
behavior
of
the
diagram
for
the
structure with the layered model columns.

The loading path is traced on the
layered
section
of the exterior column.
of the two exterior columns are

lateral
load
on
the structure.
shown in Fig.6.25.
force
plotted
interaction
The loading paths at the base

for
monotonically
These two loading paths take the form
One is subjected to monotonically
superimposed
on
the
dead
load,
th~
other
monotonically decreasing axial force down from the dead

figure,
loading
flat
increasing
axial
is subjected to a
load.
In
the
path No.2 for the column section with increasing axial
force starts from the

becoming
increasing
Nd=5.5
KN.(
dead
load).
It
rises
when yielding occurs at the ends of the beams.
gradually
Once the
76
loading path
reaches
the
yielding
line
on
its
moment-axial
interaction diagram, the slope becomes stiffer again until that

path
reaches
diagram.
this
force
loading
the ultimate branch of the moment-axial force interaction
At this point the edge of the column section
crushing
occurs
crushes.
After
and if still increasing axial load is induced to
the section, the column cross section changes into another cross section
with
the
crush
portion
deleted from the original section.
case the loading path turns inside taking on arbitrary

upon
the section properties and loading combination.
for a column section with decreasing axial force also

level Nd=5.5 KN.( dead load).
slope
In such a
depending
Loading path No.1

starts
from
the
It decreases along a path symmetric about
the axis of Nd=5.5 KN., with loading path No.2.
Distortion of the curve
shown as loading No.1 is probably the result of a small numerical error.

Once loading path No.1 reaches the yielding line
continues
to
decrease,
the
begins
point
toward
the
axial
force
(this may entail an increase in tension if the
axial force has reached into

heading
and
the
tensile
range.)
the
loading
path
of the pure tension failure for the
cross section.
6.4.2 Effect Q[ Changing Axial Force under One Cycle Loading

The
base
structure(Fw-2)
shear-top
under
one
story
displacement
cycle
loading
relationship
of
the
is shown in Fig.6.26.
This
entire load-displacement relationship is identical for
both
cases(
by
the layered model and by the concentrated spring model).

The moment-curvature hysteresis loops
shown
in
Fig.6.27.
For
the
of
layered
sections
are
first one quarter cycle of loading, the
77
curves of No.1 and No.2 are the same as the ones just described for
case of monotonically increasing load.
loading
as
occurred,
rigidity.
of
No.2
next
half
cycle
shown
in
Fig.3.11(d).
the
column
After
The stiffness of this portion is

this
snap-through
section again demonstrates stiffer flexural
How much depends upon the level of axial force.

on
the
other
phenomenon
The
column
side of the structure then experiences similar
relationships of a form which appears antisymmetrical about the

In
of
For the structural analysis this phenomenon is
replaced by a small positive one.

has
the
and unloading, the column layered section of No.1 experiences a
snap-through phenomenon.
modified
For
the
origin.
order to verify this hysteresis loop, check points are created along
its path.
The results are illustrated in Fig.6.28.
The behavior of the
cross section illustrated in the figure shows how the steel and concrete
strains in its cross section shift during one cycle loading.
78
CHAPTER 7
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
7.1 Summary
The
nonlinear
analyses
of
multistory
concrete
reinforced
frame-wall structures subjected to strong motion earthquakes are carried

out.
The structures used in
D.P.Abrams
using
the
the
investigation
University
are
those
tested
of Illinois Earthquake Simulator[2].
Three mathematical models: the concentrated spring model, the

spring
model,
and
inelastic behavior
nonlinear
their
the
of
behavior
material
considered.
of
these
Hysteresis
are
concrete
mechanical
to
structures of Abrams.
column
members.
only
when
the
the
10-story
reinforced
input
computed results
mechanical
These
concrete
The concentrated spring model is used

is
applied
effect
of
changing
axial
force
The structures are first analyzed for static loads.
the dynamic tests are computed.

acceleration
not
to
The layered model is applied to the first story exterior
members
investigated.
The
are
nonlinearities
for the frame members whereas the multiple spring model

wall
beam.
each model are established.
for
applied
cantilever
models is introduced through
Geometrical
loops
multiple
model, are presented to represent the
reinforced
properties.
mechanical models
frame-wall
layered
a
by
models
records
are
are
obtained
compared
shown
For
with
dynamic
from
the
loads,
the
the
test
experimental
Then
time-history
are
used.
results.
The
The
to be useful tools for investigating the
behavior of reinforced concrete frame-wall structures under both

and seismic loadings.
is
static
79
7.2 Gonsclusions
The modeling of reinfor'ced concrete structures to
inelastic
response
is
study,
close
or
reasonably
experimental results is obtained.

mechanical
models,
which
faithful
improvement
in
necessitates
results.
But by
described
reproduction
of
in
the
Using more sophisticated material and

the introduction of additional
parameters to define, leads to extra computational

small
their
very difficult, complicated problem.
adopting the simple assumptions and analytical procedures

this
include
It
should
be
effort
with
but
kept in mind that the
results obtained in this study are for the laboratory test specimens.
The following statements are also added to the conclusions.
1.
Inelastic actions of the wall play the major

role
in
controlling the structural response. The multiple spring model
shows the detailed inelastic behavior of the wall.
2.
Frequencies of the structure decrease considerably during the

earthquake motion reflecting a significant
reduction
of
structural component stiffnesses.
3.
The mechanical models used in the study

the concentrated
spring model for frame members and the multiple spring model
for wall members, satisfactorily reproduce the response values
and the response waveforms of the specimens.
4.
Pinching action of column-beam joints produces only slightly

larger displacements and slightly smaller accelerations, and
shear forces in the structure since the wall members dominate
the behavior of the structure.
5.
Reduction of flexural rigidity of the first story exterior

columns due to the effect of changing axial load does not
significantly alter the overall behavior of this structure.
This is again a consequence of the structure being dominated
mainly by its wall.
The layered model shows the detailed
behavior of the inelastic zone of these column members.
6.
Even though response-history calculations are very expensive,

consuming both time and money, an inelastic response-history
80
analysis using the concentrated spring model and the multiple
spring model produces very detailed information about the
response of structures to a particular earthquake. Therefore
the response-history approach though expensive is a very
effective tool to study the influence of certain quantities on
the response.
7.
By proper design of the beam members in a frame, yielding in

the column members can be minimized. Computed dynamic results
demonstrate the adequacy of this design philosophy.
7.3 Recommendations for Further Studies

Some areas of further studies are,
1
Using the mathematical model

investigate the influence of
parameters.
2.
Extend the
effects.
3.
Extend the mechanical model to predict both bending failures

and shear failures in wall members so that individual and
combined effects of inelastic interaction can be assessed.
4.
The models presented in this study are limited to plane

structures with the makeup of the laboratory test specimen.
The mathematical models should be extended to the general case
taking account
(a) the effect of slabs, (b) non-uniformly
reinforced beams, (c) the effect of torsion, etc.
analysis
developed
variations
in
this
study,
in the significant
procedure to include nonlinear geometric
Before additional analytical progress is made,however, some experimental

research is necessary on,
1.
Shear deformation characteristics of shear walls.
2.
Shear deformation characteristics of beam-column joint panels.
3.
Moment-curvature relations and failure criterior for reinforced

concrete columns under changing axial load.
4.
Load-deflection curves of various types of shear walls: I-beam

type, channel type, box type, and circular type, etc.
81
steps
The
further
studies
to
understand
the
structures.
described herein will be the next advanced

inelastic
behavior
of
reinforced concrete
82
LIST OF REFERENCES
1.
Abrams, D. P., "Measured Hysteresis Relationships for Small-Scale

Beams,1I Civil Engineering Studies, Structural Research Series,
No. 432, University of Illinois, Urbana, November 1976.
2.
Abrams, D. P., and Sozen, M. A., IIExperimental Study of Frame-Wall

Interaction in Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Strong
Earthquake Motions," Civil Engineering Studies, Structural Research
Series, University of Illinois, Urbana (to be published).
3.
ACI Corrnnittee 442, Title No. 68-11, "Response of Buildings to Lateral

Forces."
4.
Agrawal, A. B., Jaeger, L. G., and Mufti, A. A., IICrack Propagation

and Plasticity of Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall under Monotonic and
Cyclic Loading," Conf. on Finite Element Methods in Engr., Adelaide,
Australia, December 1976.
5.
Aktan, E., Pecknold, D. A. W., and Sozen, M. A., "RIC Column Earthquake Response in Two Dimensions,1I Journal of the Structural Division,
ASCE, Vol. 100, No. ST10, October 1974, pp. 1999-2015.
6.
Anderson, J. C., and Townsend, W. H., "Models for RC Frames with

Degrading Stiffness,1I Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE,
December 1977.
7.
Aoyama, H., "Moment-Curvature Characteristics of Reinforced Concrete

Members Subjected to Axial Load and Reveral of Bending,1I Proceedings
of.International Symposium on the Flexural Mechanics of Reinforced
Concrete, ASCE-ACI, Miami, November 1964, pp. 183-212.
8.
Bathe, K. J., and Wilson, E. L., "Stabil ity and Accuracy Analysis of
Direct Integration Methods of Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, Vol. 1, No.3, January-March 1973, pp. 283-291.
9.
Chen, W. F., and Atsuta, T., "Theory of Beam-Columns," Vol. 1, McGrawHill, Inc., New York, N.Y., 1976.
10.
Clough, R. W., and Benuska, K. L., IINon1inear Earthquake Behavior of

Tall Buildings," Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE,
Vol. 93, No. EM3, June 1967, pp. 129-146.
11.
Clough, R. W., and Penzien, J., "Dynamics of Structures," McGraw-Hill,

Inc., New York, N.Y., 1975.
12.
Darwin, D., and Pecknold, D. A. W" "Analysis of RC Shear Panels under

Cyclic Loading," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 102,
No. ST2, February 1976, pp. 355-369.
83
13.
Fintel, M., IIHandbook of Concrete Engineering,1I Van Nostrand Reinhold,

New York, N.Y., 1974.
14.
Gavlin, N. L., "Bond Characteristics of Model Reinforcement,1I Civil

Engineering Studies, Structural Research Series, No. 427, University
of Illinois, Urbana, 1976.
15.
Giberson, M. F., "The Response of Nonlinear Multi-Story Structures

Subjected to Earthquake Excitation,1I Earthquake Engineering Research
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, 1967.
16.
Gurfinkel, G., and Robinson, A., IIDetennination of Strain Distribution

and Curvature in a Reinforced Concrete Section Subjected to Bending
Moment and Longitudinal Load," ACI Journal, Title No. 64-37, July 1967.
17.
Hand, F. R., Pecknold, D. A., and Schnobrich, W. C., IINonlinear Layered

Analysis of RC Plates and Shells," Journal of the Structural Division,
ASCE, Vol. 99, No. ST7, July 1973, pp. 1491-1505.
18.
Harrison, H. B., "Computer Methods in Structural Analysis," PrenticeHall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1973.
19.
Hays, C. 0., Jr., and Matlock, H., IINonlinear Discrete Element Analysis
of Frames," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 103, No. ST10,
October 1973.
20.
Hisada, T., Ohmor;, N., and Bessho, S., IIEarthquake Design Considerations
in Reinforced Concrete Columns,1I Kajima Institute of Construction Technology, Tokyo, Japan, January 1972.
21.
Hognestad, E., "A Study of Combined Bending and Axial Load in Reinforced
Concrete MenDers." University of Illinois Engineering Experimental
.
Station, Bul1et1n Series No. 399, November 1951, p. 128.
22.
Karsan, I. D., and Jirsa, J. 0., "Behavior of Concrete under Compressive

J~Jrnal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, No. ST12,
December 1969.
Loadings,~
23.
Karlsson, E. 1.. Aoyama, H., and Sozen, M. A., "Spirally Reinforced

Concrete Columns Subjected to Loading Reversals," Fifth World Conference
on EarthQuakr Engineering, Session 2-D, Rome, Italy, 1973.
24.
Kent, D. C. dnd Pdr~, R., "Flexural Members with Confined Concrete,"

journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. ST7, July 1971,
pp. 1969-1990.
25.
Kreger, M. E., and Abrams, D. P., "Measured Hysteresis Relationships

for Small-Scale Beam-Column Joints,1I Civil Engineering Studies,
Structural Research Series, No. 453, University of Illinois, Urbana,
August 1978.
84
26.
Kubota, T., IIStudies on Strength and Deformation of Reinforced Concrete

Flexural Members under Consideration of Bond Stress,1I Ph.D. Thesis,
The Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan, 1972.
27.
Lybas, J. M., and Sozen, M. A., IIEffect of Beam Strength and Stiffness
on Dynamic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Coupled Walls,1I Civil
Engineering Studies, Structural Research Series, No. 444, University
of Illinois, Urbana, July 1977.
28.
McNamara, J. F., IISo1ution Schemes for Problems of Nonlinear Structural

Dynamics,1I Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, ASME, May 1974.
29.
Montgomery, C. J., and Hall, W. J., IIStudies on the Seismic Design of

Low-Rise Steel Buildings,1I Civil Engineering Studies, Structural
Research Series, No. 442, University of Illinois, Urbana, July 1977.
30.
Muto, K., IIAseismatic Design Analysis of Buildings,1I Maruzen Syoten,

Inc., Tokyo, Japan, 1974.
31.
Newmark, N. M., IIA Method of Computation for Structural Dynamics,"

Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, Vol. 85, No. EM3,
Proc. Paper 2099, July 1959, pp. 67-94.
32.
Otani, S., IIInelastic Analysis of RIC Frame Structures," Journal of

the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 100, No. ST7, July 1974, pp. 14331449.
33.
Otani, S., IISAKE, A Computer Program for Inelastic Analysis of RIC

Frames to Earthquake,1I Civil Engineering Studies, Structural Research
Series, No. 413, University of Illinois, Urbana, November 1974.
34: Otani, S., and Sozen, M. A., "Behavior of Multistory Reinforced

Concrete Frames during Earthquakes," Civil Engineering Studies,
Structural Research Series, No. 392, University of Illinois, Urbana,
November 1972.
35.
36.
Padilla-Mora, R., and Schnobrich, W. C., IINonlinear Response of Framed

Structures to Two-Dimensional Earthquake Motion," Civil Engineering
Studies, Structural Research Series, No. 408, University of Illinois,
-Urbana, July 1974.
Park, R., and Pau1ay, T., "Reinforced Concrete Structures,1I John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y., 1975.
37.
Park, R., Kent, D. C., and Sampson, R. A., IIReinforced Concrete Members
with Cyclic Loading,1I Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 98,
ST7, July 1972, pp. 1341-1360.
38.
Schnobrich, W. C., IIBehavior of Reinforced Concrete Structures Predicted

by the Finite Element Method,1I An International Journal, Computers &
Structures, Vol. 7, No.3, June 1977, pp. 365-376.
85
39.
Sinha, B. P., Gerstle, K. H., and Tulin, L. G., flStress-Strain

Relations for Concrete under Cylic Loading,fI Journal ACI, Proc.,
Vol. 61, No.2, February 1964, pp. 195-211.
40.
Sozen, M. A., flHysteresis in Structural Elements," Applied Mechanics

in Earthquake Engineering, ASME, AMD, Vol. 8, November 1974, pp. 63-98.
41.
Suidan, M., and Schnobrich, W. C., "Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 99,
No. ST10, Proc. Paper 10081, October 1973, pp. 2109-2122.
42.
Takayanagi, T., and Schnobrich, W. C., "Computed Behavior of Reinforced

Concrete Coupled Shear Walls," Civil Engineering Studies, Structural
Research Series, University of Illinois, Urbana, December 1976.
43.
Takeda, T., IIDynamic Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures (in

Japanese),11 Concrete Journal, Japan National Council on Concrete,
JANACC, Vol. 12, No.8, August 1974, pp. 33-41.
44.
Takeda, T., Sozen, M. A., and Nielsen, N. N., IIReinforced Concrete

Response to Simulated Earthqueks,1I Journal of the Structural Division,
ASCE, Vol. 96, No. ST12, December 1970, pp. 2557-2573.
45.
Takizawa, H., IIStrong Motion Response Analysis of Reinforced Concrete

Buildings (in Japanese),'1 Concrete Journal, Japan National Council on
Concrete, JANACC, Vol. 11, No.2, February 1973, pp. 10-21.
46.
Thomas, K., and Sozen, M. A., "A Study of the Inelastic Rotation
Mechanism of Reinforced Concrete Connections,1I Civil Engineering
Studies, Structural Research Series, No. 301, University of Illinois,
Urbana, August 1965.
47.
Wakabayashi, M., IIBehavior of Systems,1I Panel Papers and Discussions,

Proceedings, Sixth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1,
New Delhi, India, 1977.
48.
Weeks, G., IITemporal Operators for Nonlinear Structural Dynamics

Problems,11 Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, Vol. 98,
No. EM5, October 1972.
49.
Wight, J. K., and Sozen, M. A., "Strength Decay of Reinforced Concrete

Columns," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 101, No. ST5,
May 1975, pp. 1053-1065.
50.
Wilson, E. L., Farhoomand, J., and Bathe, K. J., IINonlinear Dynamic

Analysis of Complex Structures,1I Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, Vol. 1, 1973, pp. 241-252.
51.
Yuzugull u, 0., and Schnobri ch, W. C., "A Numeri ca 1 Procedure for the
Determination of the Behavior of a Shear Wall Frame System,1I Journal
ACI, Proc., Vol. 70, No.7, July 1973, pp. 474-479.
86
TABLE 2.1
REINFORCING SCHEDULES FOR THE STRUCTURES OF FW-1

AND FW-2
FW-1
STORY
OR
LEVEL
WALLS
10
2
2
2
2
8
7
BEAMS
2
3
3
3
3
3
6
5
3
2
2
2
1.+
8
8
FW-2
COLUMNS
(EXT. )
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
COLUMNS
(INT. )
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
WALLS
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
BEAMS
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
COLUMNS COLUMNS
(EXT. ) (INT. )
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
NUMBER OF NO.2G WIRES PER ONE SIDE OF CROSS

SECTION,
6.65 MM.
1-NO.2G WIRE DIAMETER
34.8 MM**2
AREA
NUMBER OF NO.13G WIRES PER FACE
FOR EEl"...:;. COLUMNS
2.34 MM.
1-NO.13G WIRE DIAMETER
4.29 MM**2
AREA
FOR
.A~~.
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
87
TABLE 5.1
ASSUMED CHARACTERISTICS OF A CANTILEVER BEAM

SPECIMEN FOR HYSTERESIS LOOP STUDY (FIG.5.3)
LENGTH (MM.)
152.4
RIGID ZONE
25.4
(~~.)
FLEXURAL RIGIDITIES
(KN-M.**2)
(SHOWN IN FIG.3.4)
SHEAR DEFORMATION INCLUDED
STEEL BAR SLIP INCLUDED
= 9.57
= 2. 14
= 0.08
3D1
SD2
SD3
CRACKING MOMENT
YIELDING MOMENT
(KN-M.)
(KN-M.)
LOADING PROCESS
(KN.)
0.03
0.125
CASE
CYCLE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
CASE 2
LOAD
1 .07
-1 . 16
1.25
-1.34
1 .42
-1 .51
1 .60
-1 .69
1 .74
0.0
CYCLE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
LOAD
0.445
-0.445
1 . 11
-0.89
1 . 16
-1 . 16
1 .25
-0.223
1 .34
-1.38
CYCLE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
LOAD
1 .38
0.89
1 .42
-1 . 11
-0.445
-1 .43
1 .47
-1.56
1 .56
0.0
88
TABLE 5.2
ASSUHED CHARACTERISTICS OF A BEAM-COLUMN JOINT

SPECIMEN FOR LOAD-DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIP
STUDY (FIG.5.5)
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
CONCRETE
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
TENSILE STRENGTH
YOUNG MODULUS
SHEAR MODULUS
STRAIN AT f'C
AT ULTIMATE
AT f t
f'c
ft
EC
(MPA)
(MPA)
(MPA)
(MPA)
E:o
E:cu
E:
STEEL REINFORCEMENT
YIELD STRESS
fsy
ULTIMATE STRESS
fsu
YOUNG MODULUS
ES
STRAIN AT YIELD
E:y
AT ULTIMATE
E:SU
AL STRAIN HARDENING
* THE VALUE IN THE (
(MPA)
(MPA)
(MPA)
) IS PREFERABLE
42.4
3.25
30800
*(22000)
13200
0.003
0.004
0.000105
356
382
203000
0.00175
0.07
0.01
89
TABLE 5.2
2.
(CONTINUE D)
SECTION PROPERTIES
DIMENSION
BEAM
COLUMN
3.
(MM. )
STEEL
(WIRE)
38.0 X 38.0
38.0 X 51.0
2 X
2 X
RIGID LENGTH
(MM. )
2-NO.13G
2-NO.13G
152.4
114.3
STIFFNESS PROPERTIES
SD
MC
MY
BEAM
COLUMN
4.
LENGTH
SD2
SD3
MC
MY
5.68
9.71
1 .38
2.25
0.043
0.083
0.031
0.055
0.086
0.122
CYCLE
2
3
4
=
=

CRACKING MOMENT (KN-M.)
YIELDING MOMENT (KN-M. )
SD1
LOADING PROCESS
= FLECTURAL RIGIDITY (KN-M**2)
(LOAD INCREMENT
LOAD (KN.)
1 .0
0.0
-1.0
0.0
1 .0
*1/50)
(MM. )
25.4
19. 1
90
TABLE 5.3
1.
ASSUMED CHARACTERISTICS OF A CANTILEVER WALL

SPECIMEN FOR LOAD-DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIP
STUDY
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
CONCRETE
TENSILE STRENGTH
YOUNG MODULUS
SHEAR MODULUS
STRAIN AT f'c
AT ULTIMATE
AT f t
EC
(MPA)
(MPA)
(MPA)
(MPA)
fc
ft
EO
ECU
E
STEEL REINFORCEMENT
YIELD STRESS
fsy
ULTIMATE STRESS
fsu
YOUNG MODULUS
ES
STRAIN AT YIELD
Ey
AT ULTIMATE
ESU
AT STRAIN HARDENING
THE VALUE IN THE (
(MPA)
(MPA)
(MPA)
) IS PREFERABLE
33. 1
2.86
27200
*(22000)
11600
0.003
0 .. 004
0.000105
338
386
200000
0.00169
0.08
0.01
91
TABLE 5.3
2.
(CONTINUED)
SECTION PROPERTIES
DIMENSION
WALL
3.
(MM. )
STEEL
(WIRE)
LENGTH
(MM. )
38.0 X 203.0
2 X 2-NO.2G
686.0
STIFFNESS PROPERTIES
(A)
WALL
(B)
SD
EI
MC
MY
=
=
=
FLECTURAL RIGIDITY (KN-M**2.)

FLEXURAL RIGIDITY (KN-M.**2)
YIELDING MOMENT (KN-M.)
CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL

SD1
SD2
SD3
MC
MY
2097
525
22.2
0.98
4.42
MULTIPLE
SPRING MODEL
NUMBER OF ELEMENTS
7
LEGTH OF EACH ELEMENT MM. (FIXED END TO FREE END)
12.7 25.3 63.5 101.8 .127.0 177.8 177.8
EA
EACH
WALL
ELEMENT
193000
GA
EI1
EI2
35000
661
204
EI3
1 .8
MC
MY
0.98 4.42
92
TABLE 5.3
(C)
(CONTINUED)
LAYERED MODEL
LENGTH (MM.)
LENGTH OF INELASTIC ZONE (MM.)
CROSS-SECTION (MM.)
NUMBER OF CONCRETE LAYERS
"
UNCONFINED LAYERS
(EACH,TOP AND BOTTOM)
WIDTH OF UNCONFINED CONCRETE
ON EACH SIDE OF CROSS-SECTION (MM)
STEEL REINFORCEMENT (TOP AND BOTTOM)
STEEL AREA AND DISTANCE FROM THE
TOP OF THE CROSS SECTION
AREA(MM**2)
( 1)
(2)
4.
LOADING PROCESS
CYCLE
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
8
70
70
DISTANCE(MM.)
10.2
193.0
(LOAD INCREMENT
LOAD (KN.)
6.85
0.0
-6.50
0.0
7.40
0.0
-6.50
0.0
*1/50)
686.0
71 .
38.0
203.0
40
5.1
2X2 NO.2G WIRES
93
TABLE 6.1
(A)
SUMMARY OF ASSUMED ANALYTICAL CONDITIONS

FOR NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
STATIC LOADING
GENERAL CONDITIONS
LOADING SHAPE
MAXIMUM LOAD AT TOP
LOADING INCREMENT
CASE
TYPE
1
2
3
LOADING
CONDITION
FW-1
FW-2
FW-2
FW-2
TRIANGULAR SHAPE OVER HIGHT

4.45 KN.
MAXIMUM LOAD *1/50
MONOTONIC
MONOTONIC
MONOTONIC
CYCLIC
WHERE
C = CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL
M = MULTIPLE SPRING MODEL
L = LAYERED MODEL
TYPE OF
CANTILEVER
BEAM MODEL
C,
C,
C,
C,
M
M
M, L
M, L
HYSTERESIS
MODEL
94
TABLE 6.1 . (CONTINUED)
(B)
DYNAMIC LOADING
GENERAL CONDITIONS
DAMPING FACTOR
TIME INTERVAL, SEC.
DURATION TIME, SEC.
NUMBER OF STEPS
CASE
1
2
3
4
TYPE
EXPERIMENTAL
RUN
FW-1
FW-1
FW-2
FW-2
FW-2
RUN-1
RUN-3
RUN-1
RUN-2
RUN-2
0.02
0.0004
3.0
7500
MAXIMUM
BASE
ACC.
0.55G
2.41G
0.49G
0.92G
0.92G
WHERE
C = CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL
M = MULTIPLE SPRING MODEL
TYPE OF
CANTILEVER
BEAM MODEL
C,
C,
C,
C,
C,
M
M
M
M
M
HYSTERESIS
MODEL
1
1
1
1
2
95
TABLE 6.2
ASSUMED MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR

FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES
PROPERTIES
CONCRETE
FW-1
TENSILE STRENGTH
YOUNG MODULUS
ft
fC
Et
(MPA)
(MPA)
(MPA)
SHEAR MODULUS
STRAIN AT f~
AT ULTIMATE
AT ft
(MPA)
So
scu
St
FW-2
42. 1
33.1
2.86
3.24
30700
27200
*(23000)
*(19300)
11600
13100
0.003
0.003
0.004
0.004
0.000105
0.000105
STEEL REINFORCEMENT
FW-l AND FW-2
f
(MPA)
YIELD STRESS
ULTIMATE STRESS
fru (MPA)
YOUNG MODULUS
ES (MPA)
STRAIN AT YIELD
Sy
STRAIN AT ULTIMATE
ssu
STRAIN AT STRAIN HARDENING
* THE VALUE IN THE (
BEAMS
COLUMNS
WALLS
352
382
200000
0.00178
0.07
0.01
338
400
200000
0.00170
0.07
0.002
) IS PREFERABLE
96.
TABLE 6.3
1.
CONFIGURATIONS OF THE STRUCTURES FW-1 AND FW-2
COMMON PARAMETERS
NO. OF STORIES
HEIGHT OF EACH STORY (MM.)
WEIGHT OF EACH STORY (K,..)
BEAM LENGTH (MM.)
" RIGID ZONE LENGTH
COLUMN LENGTH (MM.)
RIGID ZONE LENGTH
"
UNLOADING COEFFICIENT FOR
HYSTERESIS RULES
2.
10
229.
45+
305.
25.4
229.
19.
0.5
WALL MEMBERS
NO. OF ELEMENTS FOR WALL MEMBERS AND LENGTH OF EACH ELEMENT
LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
NO.
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
7
(FROM TOP TO BOTTOM)

1
4
2
3
114.3 114.3
114.3 114.3
114.3 114.3
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
57.2
57.2
57.2
57.0
57.2
57.2
57.0
57.2
38. 1 38.1
38. 1
38.1
38. 1
25.4
12.7
97
TABLE 6.4
STIFFNESS PROPERTIES OF CONSTITUENT MEMBERS

OF THE STRUCTURES FW-l AND FW-2
EA
GA
EI
=
=
=
SD
MC
=
=
MY
WALL MEMBERS
LEVEL
10
2'1000.
2'1000.
2' 1000.
2"000.
2"1000.
8
7
6
c,
~)1'JOO.
2"JOO.
211)00.
.I
2'~')JJ.
2'
;-, , JOO.
BA~
~~~!',E:E.3
..
"
~
,....,
--..;!
L"'''~
t.,:..~
10
.~,
.~
9
8
. 5J
5.50
0.80
8.80
6.51
6.51
6.51
6.51
6
5
4
3
2
1
(FW-l )
GA
EA
::3.
~:J
AXIAL RIGIDITY (KN. )

SHEAR RIGIDITY (KN. )
FLEXURAL RIGIDITY (KN-M**2.)
SHOWN IN FIG.3.5
SHOWM IN FIG.3.4
"
CRACKING MOMENT (KN-M. )
YIELDING MOMENT (KN-M. )
37600.
37600.
37600.
37600.
37600.
37600.
37600.
37600.
37600.
37600.
Ell
EI2
EI3
MC
726.
726.
726.
726.
726.
726.
726.
726.
726.
726.
242.
242.
242.
242.
515.
515 .
717.
717.
717.
717.
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
8.6
8.6
12.6
12.6
12.6
12.6
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.76
(fW-l)
SD2
, .20
1 .83
1 .83
, .83
1 .83
1 .83
1 .20
1 .20
1 .20
1 .20
SD3
0.049
0.098
0.098
0.098
0.098
0.098
0.049
0.049
0.049
0.049
MC
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
MY
0.086
o. 126
o. 126
O. 126
o. 126
O. 126
0.086
0.086
0.086
0.086
MY
4.23
4.23
4.23
4.23
7.54
7.54
14. 12
14. 12
14. 12
14. 12
98
TABLE 6.4
(CONTINUED)
EA
GA
SD
MC
MY
= AXIAL RIGIDITY (KN.)

= SHEAR RIGIDITY (KN.)
= FLEXURAL RIGIDITY (KN-M**2.)
= CRACKING MOMENT (KN-M.)
= YIELDING MOMENT (KN-M.)
EXTERIOR COLUMN MEMBERS

LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
EA
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
3D1
SD2
SD3
MC
8.38
8.38
9.34
9.34
9.34
9.34
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
1.82
1 .82
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
0.060
0.060
0.066
0.066
0.066
0.066
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.047
0.047
0.067
0.067
0.067
0.067
0.085
0.085
0.085
0.085
INTERIOR COLUMN MEMBERS

LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
EA
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
52700.
(FW-1)
MY
0.124
O. 124
0.158
o. 158
0.158
O. 158
0.194
o. 194
0.194
0.194
(FW-1)
SD1
SD2
SD3
MC
12.64
12.64
9.34
9.34
9.34
9.34
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
2.83
2.83
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
0.066
0.066
0.066
0.066
0.066
0.066
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.047
0.047
0.067
0.067
0.067
0.067
0.085
0.085
0.085
0.085
MY
O. 170
O. 170
0.158
O. 158
O. 158
0.158
0.194
O. 194
O. 194
O. 194
99
TABLE 6.4
(CONTINUED)
WALL MEMBERS
LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
EA
EA
GA
EI
=
=
=
SD
MC
MY
=
=
(FW-2)
GA
237600.
237600.
237600.
237600.
237600.
237600.
237600.
237600.
237600.
237600.
BEAM MEMBERS
AXIAL RIGIDITY (KN.)

SHEAR RIGIDITY (KN.)
FLEXURAL RIGIDITY (KN-M**2)
SHOWN IN FIG.3.5
SHOWM IN FIG.3.4
"
YIELDING MOMENT (KN-M.)
42270.
42270.
42270.
42270.
42270.
42270.
42270.
42270.
42270.
42270.
EI1
EI2
EI3
MC
818.
818.
818.
818.
818.
818.
818.
818.
818.
818.
263.
263.
263.
263.
263.
263.
263.
263.
263.
263.
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
MC
MY
(FW-2)
LEVEL
SD1
SD2
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
7.18
7 . 18
7.18
9.57
9.56
9.55
9.54
9.53
7. 18
7. 18
1 .32
1 .32
1 .32
2.14
2.14
2. 14
2.14
2.14
1 .32
1 .32
SD3
0.049
0.049
0.049
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.049
0.049
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.088
0.088
0.088
O. 125
O. 125
0.125
0.125
O. 125
0.088
0.088
MY
4.23
4.23
4.23
4.23
4.23
4.23
4.23
4.23
4.23
4.23
100
TABLE 6.4
(CONTINUED)
EA
GA
SD
MC
MY
AXIAL RIGIDITY (KN.)

SHEAR RIGIDITY (KN.)
FLEXURAL RIGIDITY (KN-M**2)
SHOWN IN FIG.3.4
= CRACKING MOMENT (KN-M.)
= YIELDING MOMENT (KN-M.)
=
=
=
EXTERIOR COLUMN MEMBERS

LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
EA
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
SD1
SD2
SD3
MC
8.93
8.93
11 .22
11 .22
11.22
11.22
12.83
16.54
16.54
16.54
1 .81
1 .81
2.42
2.42
2.42
2.42
2.92
4.23
4.23
4.23
0.060
0.060
o. 103
0.103
O. 103
0.103
O. 149
o. 180
o. 180
0.180
0.053
0.053
0.072
0.072
0.072
0.072
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
INTERIOR COLUMN MEMBERS

LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
EA
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
59400.
(FW-2)
MY
O. 125
0.125
0.170
0.170
O. 170
0.170
0.211
0.211
0.211
0.211
(FW-2)
SD1
SD2
SD3
MC
8.93
8.93
11 .22
11 .22
11.22
11.22
12.83
12.83
12.83
12.83
1 .81
1 .81
2.42
2.42
2.42
2.42
2.92
2.92
2.92
2.92
0.060
0.060
0.103
0.103
0.103
0.103
0.149
O. 149
o. 149 '
O. 149
0.053
0.053
0.072
0.072
0.072
0.072
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
MY
O. 125
0.125
o. 170
O. 170
0.170
O. 170
0.211
0.211
0.211
0.211
101
TABLE 6.5
1.
(A)
FW-1
MODE SHAPE
BEFORE RUN
AFTER 0.55G
RUN-1
AFTER 2.41G
RUN-3
MODE
MODE
MODE
LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
(B)
MODE SHAPES AND FREQUENCIES OF THE

STRUCTURES FW-1 AND FW-2
1
2
3
1 .36 -0.56 0.32
1 .26 -0.33 0.04
1 . 15 -0.07 -0.20
1 .02 o. 17 -0.31
0.87 0.36 ~0.24
0.70 0.47 -0.03
0.52 0.49 0.21
0.35 0.40 0.34
o. 19 0.25 0.30
0.06 0.10 O. 14
FREQUENCY,
1
2
3
1..43 -0.65 0.33
1 .27 -0.31 -0.02
1 . 11 0.02 -0.29
0.94 0.30 -0.35
0.77 0.46 -0. 18
0.60 0.51 0.08
0.44 0.48 0.29
0.29 0.38 0.37
o. 16 0.24 0.31
0.06 0.09 o. 15
HZ
5.0
1
2
3
1 .43 -0.64 0.33
1.27 -0.31 -0.01
1 . 11 0.01 -0.27
0.94 0.28 -0.34
0.76 0.46 -0.20
0.59 0.54 0.05
0.42 0.51 0.28
0.27 0.40 0.37
O. 14 0.24 0.31
0.04 0.09 O. 15
17.8
37.0
2.8
11 .5
27.8
2.5
10.4
MODAL PARTICIPATION FACTORS ARE INCLUDED IN MODE SHAPES
25.3
102
TABLE 6.5
2.
(A)
FW-2
MODE SHAPE
BEFORE RUN
AFTER 0.49G
RUN-1
AFTER 0.92G
RUN-2
MODE
MODE
MODE
LEVEL
'10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
(B)
(CONTINUED)
2
1
3
1.39 -0.59 0.31
1.27 -0.32 0.02
1.13 -0.04 -0.22
0.99 0.20 -0.31
0.83 0.38 -0.22
0.66 0.49 0.00
0.49 0.49 0.22
0.33 0.40 0.34
O. 18 0.25 0.29
0.05 0.09 O. 14
1
2
3
1 .41 -0.60 0.29
1 .27 -0.33 0.03
1 13 -0.05 -0. 18
0.98 0.19 -0.28
0.82 0.38 -0.24
0.66 0.50 -0.06
0.50 0.52 0.15
0.35 0.46 0.31
0.20 0.32 0.32
0.07 O. 14 0.18
2
1
3
1.39 -0.57 0.28
1.27 -0.32 0.03
1.15 -0.08 -0. 17
1 .02 O. 14 -0.27
0.88 0.32 -0.23
0.74 0.43 -0.07
0.59 0.47 O. 14
0.43 0.42 0.29
0.27 0.30 0.30
O. 11 O. 14 O. 17
2.4
2.0
FREQUENCY, HZ
5.3
18.3
38.8
10.4
26.4
8.8
MODAL PARTICIPATION FACTORS ARE INCLUDED IN MODE SHAPES
23.4
103
TABLE 6.6
( 1 ) ACCELERATION
STRUCTURE
RUN
MAX. BASE
ACC.
MAXIMUM RESPONSES OF FRAME-WALL

STRUCTURES
(G. )
FW-1
R1
FW-1
R3
FW-2
R1
FW-2
R2
FW-2
R2,SL
0.55G
2.41G
0.49G
0.92G
0.92G
LEVEL
10
1 .06
-1.23
0.68
-0.90
0.61
-0.71
0.63
-0.64
0.67
-0.62
0.63
-0.58
0.62
-0.51
0.61
-0.47
0.59
-0.42
0.57
-0.37
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
SL
1 .48
-1.99
0.95
-1 . 18
0.84
-0.95
0.92
-1.33
1 11
-1.36
1 .10
-1.42
1 .26
-1.65
1 .32
-1.86
1 .28
-2.05
1 .31
-2.18
= HYSTERESIS
JOINTS
0.68
-0.68
0.55
-0.52
0.49
-0.42
0.48
-0.42
0.46
-0.40
0.42
-0.44
0.37
-0.45
0.31
-0.44
0.33
-0.42
0.36
-0.44
0.84
-1 .01
0.60
-0.70
0.51
-0.48
0.47
-0.55
0.44
-0.66
0.56
-0.78
0.54
-0.84
0.62
-0.85
0.68
-0.79
0.66
-0.82
0.84
-0.97
0.60
-0.63
0.51
-0.45
0.46
-0.55
0.40
-0.68
0.51
-0.78
0.54
-0.83
0.65
-0.82
0.71
-0.76
0.67
-0.82
MODEL 2 USED FOR BEAM-COLUMN
104
TABLE 6.6 (continued)
(2) DISPLACEMENT
(MM. )
STRUCTURE
RUN
MAX. BASE
ACC.
LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
J
.;
FW-1
R1
FW-1
R3
FW-2
R1
0.55G
2.41G
0.49G
C
28.9
-24.3
25.6
-21.3
22.4
-18.3
18.8
-15.2
15.3
-12. 1
11.7
-8.9
8.5
-6.4
c::
./
J
.;
-4.1
2.8
-2.1
0.9
-0.6
R2
FW-2
R2,SL
0.92G
C.
28.2
45.7
-42.4
41.4
-37. 1
36.8
-32.0
32.0
-26.7
26.9
-21.7
21.3
-16.8
16.2
-12.2
58.5
23. 1
-23.6
21 1
-21 1
18.8
-18.6
16.7
-16.0
14.3
-13.3
11 7
-10.6
9. 1
-8.0
28.4
41.2
-26.1
37. 1
-23.7
32.8
-21.2
28.5
-18.6
24.0
-15.9
19.4
-13.0
14.9
-10.0
43.3
-33.2
39.2
-29.8
34.9
-26.3
30.5
-22.8
25.9
-19.2
21.1
-15.6
16.3
-12.0
26.5
23.8
20.5
17.0
13.5
9.5
'7
1
I
4. 1
2.0
1 1
I
I.
1
I
-8.0
6.4
-4.4
2.4
-1.7
49.9
41 .0
35.9
29.4
22.2
17.0
1 1
I
()
;:7
h
II
V."T
-5.5
7 . 1 3.9
-3. 1
1 .6
3.5
-1.2
25.6
23.6
20.6
17.3
14.2
10.7
Q
J
v .;
1('\
1\
I V ...,.
1 1
I
c::
...I
-7 1 -8.5
7.0
5. 1 6.3
-4.2 -5. 1
2.9
2.3
2.5
-1.6 -2.0
C = COMPUTED RESPONSE RESULTS

E = EXPERIMENTAL RESPONSE RESULTS(2]
SL = HYSTERESIS MODEL 2 USED FOR BEAM-COLUMN
JOINTS
42.8
39.2
32.7
32.0
27.5
23.4
16.2
14.6
8.9
4.7
105
(3 ) RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT (MM. )

STRUCTURE
RUN
MAX. BASE
ACC.
FW-1
R1
FW-1
R3
FW-2
R1
FW-2
R2
FW-2
R2,SL
0.55G
2.41G
0.49G
0.92G
0.92G
LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
3.2
-3.0
3.4
-3. 1
3.5
-3. 1
3.5
-3. 1
3.5
-3.0
3.3
-2.8
3.0
-2.4
2.6
-2.0
1 .9
-1.4
0.9
-0.6
4.5
-5.1
4.7
-5. 1
4.8
-5. 1
5.0
-4.9
5.2
-4.8
5.2
-4.5
4.9
-4.0
4.5
-3.4
3.8
-2.7
2.3
-1 .6
2. 1
-2.5
2.2
-2.5
2.3
-2.6
2.4
-2.6
2.5
-2.7
2.6
-2.6
2.7
-2.5
2.6
-2.3
2.3
-1 .9
1 .6
-1.2
4.2
-2.5
4.3
-2.5
4.4
-2.6
4.5
-2.7
4.6
-2.9
4.6
-3.0
4.4
-3.0
4.2
-2.9
3.7
-2.5
2.5
-1.6
4.1
-3.5
4.3
-3.5
4.4
-3.5
4.6
-3.6
4.8
-3.6
4.8
-3.6
4.8
-3.5
4.6
-3.4
4. 1
-3. 1
2.8
-2.0
106
(4) STORY SHEAR

STRUCTURE
RUN
MAX. BASE
ACC.
(KN. )
FW-1
R1
FW-1
R3
FW-2
R1
FW-2
R2
FW-2
R2,SL
0.55G
2.41G
0.49G
0.92G
0.92G
4.B
6.6
-5.4
7.7
-9.4
9.2
-12.0
10.5
-13.1
12.2
-B.9
3.0
-3.0
5.5
-5.3
7.3
-7.0
3.7
-4.5
6.4
-7.6
3.7
-4.3
6.4
-7. 1
B.o
B.O
-B.5
LEVEL
10
9
B
7
6
-14.B
5
4
3
2
14.3
-16.2
16.3
-17.2
17.B
-1B.0
1B.9
-1B.7
19.9
-19.0
10.5
-13.2
12.7
-15.0
13.9
-16.9
16.4
-15.9
17.5
-1B.2
17.B
-20.2
1B.B
-21.5
19.7
-22.9
20.4
-27.7
B.6
-B.1
9.6
-B.9
10.3
-10. 1
11 .0
-11 .2
11 .6
-12. 1
11 . 7
-12.B
11 .6
-13.3
-9.4
9. 1
-9.B
9. 1
-B.6
10.6
-10.3
11 .7
-11.5
12.4
-12.3
13.0
-13.1
13.3
-16.0
13.3
10.5
-9.7
11.6
-10.7
12.3
-11.4
12.9
-1B.7
-17.B
-12.B
13.2
-15.3
13.2
107
(5) WALL SHEAR

STRUCTURE
RUN
MAX. BASE
ACC.
(KN. )
FW-1
R1
FW-1
R3
FW-2
R1
FW-2
R2
FW-2
R2,SL
0.55G
2.41G
0.49G
0.92G
0.92G
LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
5.0
-5.0
1 .5
-3.4
4.0
-3.3
5.2
-5. 1
6.5
-6.1
8.8
-8.9
10.1
-13.1
12. 1
-13.1
13.4
-14.6
16.3
-15.1
6.9
-5.3
6.6
-5.8
5.3
-6.9
6.9
-10.6
8.6
-9.0
9.9
-12.4
12.6
-13.9
13.6
-15.7
15.0
-18.1
14.4
-22.9
4.4
-3.9
1 .6
-1.8
1 1
-1.9
2.3
-0.9
2.0
-2.4
1.3
-3.9
3.1
-4. 1
4.1
-5.3
6.3
-1.8
1.8
-5.8
5.7
-4.4
2.6
-4.3
2.5
-3.0
1 .8
-4.0
2.8
-3.4
4. 1
-4.3
3.3
-4.6
6.6
-5.9
1.0
-11 .4
1.0
-8.3
6.7
-4.3
2.5
-4.9
2. 1
-4.0
3.1
-3.3
2.7
-4.3
4.0
-3.6
3.4
-5.4
6.5
-8.3
1. 1
-9.8
1. 1
-6.3
108
(6) OVERTURNING MOMENT (KN-M. )

STRUCTURE
RUN
MAX. BASE
ACC.
FW-1
R1
FW-1
R3
FW-2
R1
FW-2
R2
FW-2
R2,SL
0.55G
2.41G
0.49G
0.92G
0.92G
LEVEL
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1 1
-1.2
2.9
-3.4
4.9
-6. 1
7.1
-9. 1
9.3
-12. 1
12.2
-15.2
15.3
-18.9
18.5
-22.6
22.8
-26.5
27.3
-30.3
1 .5
-2.0
3.8
-5.0
6.7
-8.1
9.7
-11.1
12.7
-14.7
15.7
-17.5
19.5
-20.0
23. 1
-24. 1
26.8
-28.3
31 .3
-33.7
0.7
-0.7
1 .9
-1.9
3.6
-3.5
5.6
-5.3
7.7
-7.3
9.8
-9.3
12.2
-11.3
14.7
-13.9
17.1
-16.7
19.5
-19.8
0.9
-1.0
2.3
-2.8
4.2
-4.9
6. 1
-7.2
8. 1
-9.3
10.5
-11.0
13.2
-13.1
15.9
-15.8
18.8
-18.6
21.7
-21.5
0.9
-1.0
2.3
-2.6
4.2
-4.5
6. 1
-6.5
8. 1
-8.2
10.3
-10. 1
13.0
-12.6
15.8
-15. 1
18.7
-17.8
21 .7
-20.6
109
TABLE 6.7
PROPERTIES OF LAYERED MODEL USED FOR THE

STRUCTURE FW-2
1.
MATERIAL PROPERTIES ASSUMED (COLUMN IN FW-2) ARE

TABULATED IN TABLE 6.2
2.
SECTION PROPERTIES
LENGTH (MM.)
LENGTH OF INELASTIC ZONE (MM.)
CROSS-SECTION (MM.)
NUMBER OF CONCRETE LAYERS
"
UNCONFINED LAYERS
(EACH,TOP AND BOTTOM)
WIDTH OF UNCONFINED CONCRETE
ON EACH SIDE OF CROSS-SECTION (MM)
STEEL REINFORCEMENT (TOP AND BOTTOM)
STEEL AREA AND DISTANCE FROM THE
TOP OF THE CROSS SECTION
(2)
3.
L,Jl:: N';
114.5
25.4
38.0 X 51.0
20
4
7.6
3-NO.1 3G WIRES
DISTANCE(MM.)
AREA(MM**2)
12.8
12.8
7.6
43.2
PROCESS (KN. ) (VALUES OF TOP LATERAL FORCE IN

TRIANGULAR LOAD SHAPE)
.:r::...
:l':E l
:I...:.-,E B.
2
3.56
2.67
0.0
3
-2.67
4
0.0
5
2.67
110
r~r1
305
( 12 II )
305
( 12 If )
305.
( 12" )
'" -'I - r-aI,R5!
e~]
-0
I/
Structural Frame
r
Structural Wall
Erft
IfLU
La
Section A-A
FIG. 2.1
Section 8- B
REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME-WALL TEST STRUCTURE
111
Typical Top IColumn Detoi I

Cutoff Point For Additional
Re i nforcement
Spirals
No.16g Wire Spirals ~
31.8 0.0. - Pi tch
=10
"'"
Typical
Detail
5~
76
I"A;
~---
"- 12.7 0.0. x .56 Thick

Tubing
No. 139 Wire - See Frome Reinforcing

Schedule For Number
of Bars Per Face
25.5
38
25.5
5 CL
nAn "A"
Sec t Ion
""-""
(All Dimensions Are In Mil Ii ",eters )
FIG. 2.2
REINFORCEMENT DETAILS OF STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS
203
5 Clear
48
co
ro
Spirals
Pitch = 13 To
4th Level FW-I
Only
No.160
4 - No. 20 To 4th
L-.JI
at
13 From Bose to 3rd Level
at
19 From 3rd to 6th Level
at 25 From 6th to 10th Level
Leve~
FW-I
2- No. 20 To 6th LevelJ Only

2- No. 20 Full Height of Wall
(All Dimensions Are In Millimeters)
FIG. 2.2 (continued)
Uwall
U frame
Ustructure
--I
Rigid Frames
Pr imarily Shear
Mode Deformation
FIG. 2.3
Shear Wall
Primarily Band ing
Mode Oeformat ion
Substitute-Frame' 8 Wall
Equal Oaf laction at
Each Floor Level
DEFORMATION MODES OF FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES
114
(0 )
Yielding Moment
Moment
(b)
Inelastic Curvature
Uncracked
-I--
~
\
~h
(c)
Plastic Hinge Rotation
Inelastic Zone
(a) Conti lever Beam

(b) Bending Moment Diagram
(c) Curvature Diagram
</>y = Curvature Que To Elastic Deformation
<Pu = Curvature
FIG. 2.4
DUE
To Pta st ic Deformat ion
CURVATURE DISTRIBUTION ALONG A CANTILEVER BEAM [36J
115
Cantilever Beam Models
Curvature Distribution
(Ideal ized)
Inelastic Curvature
Elastic Curvature
Elastic Beam
(0) Concentrated Spring Model
(b) Multiple Spring Model
Layered
Section
E last ic 8eam
~Inelastic
Zone
(c) Layered Model
FIG. 2.5
MECHANICAL MODELS USED IN INVESTIGATION
116
fc
....
-u
o
en
en
Q)
Q.
E
o
f =f
[2 (i)
Eo
- (~) ]
EO
Tension
Compression
Tension
Strain,
EC
( a) Concrete
--
Strain,
_Jr
ES
(b) Steel
FIG. 3. 1
IDEALIZED STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS FOR CONCRETE

AND STEEL FOR THE CONCENTRATED SPRING AND
MULTIPLE SPRING MODELS
'e
....
A. f s
--'
--'
........
(a)
Crols Section
FIG. 3.2
A. '.
(b)
Strain Distribution
(c)
Force
Distribution
DISTRIBUTIONS OF STRESS AND STRAIN OVER A CROSS SECTION
118
Ultimate
~L---------------~Ec~=O~.004
N=n
..
c:
QJ
:E
n = Axia I Force
Curvature
FIG. 3.3
IDEALIZED MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP USED

FOR THE CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL
Ultimate
Primary
Curve
Yield~i~ngL-____--------~~-;::---~
c =0.004
D(M)
8u
Free End Rotation
FIG. 3.4
IDEALIZED MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIP USED

FOR THE CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL
119
Pr\mar'j Curve
~c
FIG. 3.5
IDEALIZED MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP FOR

EACH SPRING OF THE MULTIPLE SPRING MODEL
120
f'
c
...
en
In
Q.)
~
en
ECU
ECU
( ...!l) = O. I 45 (~) + O. I 3 (:e)

"'cu
Strain,
EC
(a) Concrete
...
In
en
Q.)
~
U ')
I
I
I
I
Strain,
( b) Stee I
FIG. 3.6
IDEALIZED STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS

USED WITH THE LAYERED MODEL
ES
121
~j
,
,
~/
(E I)
~N
,
"
~
~
L
A Layered Model
-,....-
Cc
Cp
C~
f~
~flned
..
(0)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Idealized
A-A Section
Imposed
Strains
Element
Stresses
Resultant
Forces
FIG. 3.7
DISTRIBUTIONS OF STRESS AND STRAIN OVER A

CROSS SECTION OF THE LAYERED MODEL
122
M=m(cp,N)
~I
EI. = I
r
r
M1_1= m (CPI-II N1_ 1 )

I
r
r
r
'ti.,
t
FIG. 3.8
6.cp.
I
I
I
I
CPi-1
INSTANTANEOUS MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS
FOR THE LAYERED SECTION OF THE LAYERED MODEL
123
.6.L
--_____.-.._.....
u
_--~Asfs
(Tension)
E.
Ey I
I
I
I
I
IR
FIG. 3.9
BOND SLIP MECHANISM
0.03'
(0.762)
t..
34.5"
10
(876.3)
~~'B---b --
6")( 12"
(152.4 )( 304.8)
r9
l:..:.I
IQ-
(2~
...J
<J
-ee
-.5
0.02
(0.508)
S'eel Shain
"rhe Grode 60
No. 6 Bars (Deformed)
DE., x
au
Slip : (Measured Displacement AS

- Steel Bar Elongation)
Q.
C/)
E:
.. - .. ,/
'N
..p.
"t:J
CD
....0
0.01
:::J
(Q2~4)
0
0
.t
00
aool
Steel Yield ing
1
Wight 8 Sozen
0.002
QOO3
Measured Tensile Steel Strain at the Point C
FIG. 3.10
COMPARISON OF COMPUTED BOND SLIP WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA
[49]
0.004
Loading
"CJ
"0
....J
....J
Displacement
(a )
Displacement
(b)
Softening
Hardening
,
"C
0
0
...J
N
U1
Assumed
/'(---
"C
0
0
....J
Actual
(.c)
FIG. 3.11
Displacement
Decreasing
( d)
Displacement
Snap-through
TYPICAL LOAD-DISPLACEMENT CURVES FOR INELASTIC ANALYSIS
126
A'~-
v +~v
' - Rotational Spring
a) ." Concentrated Spring Model
M'A
M8
Controflexure Point
8A +A8A
MA+6MA~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~_ ~
MB+6MB
Rigid Port ion
L=l(I+2X)
b)
FIG. 4.1
Equivalent Simple Beam Model
DEFORMED SHAPES OF A CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL

AND AN EQUIVALENT SIMPLE BEAM MODEL
127
Global
Sign Conversion
M,W
L =__
( 1+
A ....._ _ _
_2A)
_ _ _ _--'S
~
v,
P,u
a) A Horizontal Member
-<
+
"
....J
B -'--.....- - - - . - .
b)
FIG. 4.2
A Vert ica I Membe r
TYPICAL MEMBERS IN GLOBAL COORDINATES SYSTEM
128
( Q )
I
~
...
B
.. {Pb},{U }
b
M,S
:p-
P,
V, v
I..
11
.1. ij .1
Local
..,
___ .r----,
I
I
Moment Distribution
--- -
FIG. 4.3
Assumed Flexural Rigidit.y
MULTIPLE SPRING MODEL
Link
IF
Actual
H/2
Concentrated Spring
Model
H
Cont raf lexure Point
Laye red Model
H/2
Base
(0)
Moment Distribut ion
FIG. 4.4
(b)
I sf Story Column
APPLICATION OF THE LAYERED MODEL TO

1ST STORY EXTERIOR COLUMNS
N
I.D
fo-u
U = ,U = zU = 3U = wU
e = (w in Fig. 4.2)
Positive Coordinate
(Gl abo I)
oirectians
o
,U A "BA, tVA
(D-th StoryA t
Kbl
A
"
UA'3 8A'31.
Kb3
K b3
AI
ZU A ,iBA' ZVA
wU A ,w8A ,
Kb2
<:)
Kcl
Kc3
Kw
Kc2
8-
th
L. Ext. Column
FIG. 4.5
3 UB. 3 8 B
Int. Column
~1e
I2. US '2Bs '2YS B
R. Ext. Column
GLOBAL COORDINATES: DISPLACEMENTS OF THE i-th AND

i-l-th STORIES OF THE STRUCTURE
,.j
WU B ,W8 B
Wall
..
c
Q)
E
o
Primary Curve
....---r;;;,- - - - - My
Displacement. D
Ku
-------
---
= KG
[~~
0.4!:: a !::. 0.5
FIG. 5.1
HYSTERESIS MODEL 1 (TAKEDA MODEL)
Assumed Cubic Function
C
CU
M = a (0 - Do )
E
o
( 011 M,)
My
Primary Curve
---1--//,
--
tI f
W
N
/
/
Displacement 0
/
,
F'
//
-- -'-~ I (-------"
I
El
C'
/
My
D I , - MI )
FIG. 5.2
HYSTERESIS MODEL 2
FLEXURAL HOHENT. KN-H.
I:
0.10
-0.10
(MO.025~).
ROTRTION
~
-0.10
0.10
-0.10
RRD.
ROTRTION
~
I:
aI
p:
oj
I
FIG. 5.3
teN.
(NO.025~).
Z.O
z.o
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
- 1.0
- 1.0
- Z.o
- loo
~".
a
I
COMPUTED MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIPS OF A CANTILEVER BEAM USING HYSTERESIS MODEL 2
0.'0
RRD.
w
w
____ __ --1
P (KN)
I
I
Analytical
- - - Experimental
./
f
1---:1;
_!
Fir
k .1
~I
II~
12 / 7
16
20
o (mm)
/
Fixed
./
'/
38x 203
",/
...----
.",.,.-----
~,,;
686mm
~.
(a) CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL
FIG. 5.4
FORCE-DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIPS OF A CANTILEVER BEAM
..
O
P (KN)
6
- - Analytical
- - - Experimental
---
-8
W
01
o (mm)
/1
/
20
16
12/
Fixed
//
38x 203
//
//
--8
".,./
~-----."""...
",
(b) MULTIPLE SPRING MODEL

686mm
.......
D
..
P (KN)
_-==:_--
_ - 1I
71
I
-.-
I
I
Anolyi11col
- - - Experimental
I
I
.--
__ _______ .t
-r---
-8
16
20
--'
o (mm)
0)
Fixed
//
,
0..
38 x 203
//
.----
,,/
",..""./
686mm
.,.",..,-
-6
{c}
LAYERED MODEL
FIG. 5.4 {continued}
..
1..
P-...
152
1
Z
8,
]14
1.2
~I.J
".-
/
I
"
----,
I
"'0
.J
0.8
Beam -Column Joints
.......
-8
Displacement, 8, mm
Experimental
Model 2
-1.0
FIG. 5.5
FORCE-DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIPS
OF BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS
[25]
Level
10
N = 0.56
9
I. I I
8
I. 6 7
KN
KN
N = 0.0
""
2.23
}
N =2.23
2.78
5
3.34
4
3.90
'\
00
4.45
2
5.00
5.56
~//////////////;,"///////~~///////////
Actural
FIG. 5.6
~
..J
N = 4.45
Assumed
ASSUMED AXIAL LOADS USED IN COLUMN MEMBERS

WHEN ESTABLISHING HYSTERESIS RULES
24
~tlo 130
S\i\!\ - - - - -
r~-\ ",...",.. .",...",...,.,

...a---
,,"
20..-
11
FW-\
,,"
/ft'
/
/
161-
~
~
CI
-~
121-1I
I
/I /
___ - - - - -
I"P'/
~~
00
P
'#
II I
Q)
In
Y'
Applied
Load
~ ~
--~-FW-2
08
earn YiYiel mg
.
l'l Wall
Starts
I1
el~mg
1.0
Colu mn Yielding
Starts
Starts
4LJ~
- - - Cracking Starts
00
10
20
---- Base Shea r ~ Q
30
Top F loar 0 isplacement (8)
FIG. 6.1
!So
40
t
60
mm
BASE SHEAR-TOP DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIPS OF THE STRUCTURES

UNDER MONOTONICALLY INCREASING EXTERNAL LOAD
70
140
0.4
,
2.0
,
kN-M
Level
kN-M
10
Ext Frame
Int. Frame
Wall
(a) Elastic
FIG. 6.2
MOMENT DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS AT THE COLLAPSE LOAD (FW-2)
141
2.0
I
0.4
,
Level
Ext Frame
. kN-M
kN-M
tnt. Frame
(b) Inelastic
Wall-
100
90
Columns
(j)
Wall B
80
Beam
earn
Colurnn
....::::J
.c
....en...
Wall
60t-
...
0
CP
.s::.
C/)
Q)
en
50
40~
Column
--'
30
Cracking
(Y) Yielding
.J:::oo
" N
Fai lure
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Base Shear, K N
FIG. 6.3
REDISTRIBUTION OF BASE SHEAR BETWEEN WALL AND COLUMNS OF STRUCTURE FW-l

UNDER MONOTONICALLY INCREASING LOAD
100
90
Columns
Wall
~Beam
....:l
Wall
.0
....en....
....
o
cu
.s:::.
(f)
cu
en
: ....;
:~l~
(,.-:; ~g
j-.~
r"t..
{]>
.~
,f
t'i
::;J' ;-L. (,.:';

.~
:J (.....
Jt t ~
"(,.,
r.....
~--t
;-.. tt1
t-1
~ ... ,~
t,'" ()
,j
CJ
~
.J.)
rt
;,~
(Xl 0
..~ ;).
t-,I \.Il
(j)
~ CrockinQ
Yielding
y.;
~l~i
~.~! It,
ti,;j ~ j
~.;;
(X/ lil
,....
t.l:i
~~
..~
r"
I1.J
Ij.\
;' .
I -k
:\
I..J;-,(,Iq
ij
,~')
'1' (,'
~...J i-j IJ)
1---1 ~:'< I~.
1'- j ~" I., t:r,r
I"
{'!l
__ J
S'
Wall
40~
Fai lure
W"
50t-
c;: c:-:
~Beom
1t:;
10
00
(.'1
C'
Base
t:j [3
Shear
9
I
10
II
12
13
KN
(;;'i
'7:j
~
r',',
c~
:~~
(.1',
>.
... ~
FIG. 6.4

OF STRUCTURE FW-2 UNDER MONOTONICALLY INCREASING LOAD
14
15
16
144
Level
10
Int. Col.
L. Ext. Col.
FIG. 6.5
R. Ext. Col.
COLLAPSE MECHANISM FOR STRUCTURE FW-l

UNDER STATIC TRIANGULAR LATERAL LOADING
Wall
145
Level
10
Int. Col.
L. Ext. Col.
FIG. 6.6
R. Ext. Col.
T= 21/50
Wall
COLLAPSE MECHANISM FOR STRUCTURE ~A-2

UNDER STATIC TRIANGULAR LATERAL LOADING
146
0.50
o.
'"AX. ACC.-O.SSG)
IAIE ACCELERATION.
2.00
,.,-1
,RUM-1
I"AX. ACC. -2.IUG)
0.50
FW-2
o.
"lAX.
lASE ACCELERRTI8M.
,"UM-l
lIee.-O.IlSGl
1.00
'''-2
'"RX.
IAIE ACCELERRTION.
0.0
1.0
2.0
'.0
(Observed)
FIG. 6.7
,RUII-2
Ace. -a. '2G)
(Used)
BASE ACCELERATION WAVEFORMS AS OBSERVED IN TESTS

AND COMPARISON WITH THOSE USED FOR RESPONSE ANALYSIS
147
Frequency (Hz)
CD
In it iol
--e-- After
Run 3 (2.41 G)
5.0
17.8
37.0
2.5
10.4
25.3
IO-------.--~--------~----~--~--------~-----P~
9
", ,
'.
,\
Q)
>
Q)
--l
..
~
(J
-1.0
-0.5
0.5
1.0
Modal Displacement
(Modal Participation Factors Included)
FIG. 6.8
MODE SHAPES OF STRUCTURE FW-l
1.5
148
Frequency (Hz)
---e--
CD
5.3
18.3
8.8
Initial
After Run 2 (0.92 G)
2.0
38.8
23.4
IO~------~--------~----~--~--------~------~
9
CD
>
1
1
CD
..J
...
I!..
,1
-LO
.. O~
0.5
1.0
Modal Displacement
(Modal Participation Factors Included)
FIG. 6.9
MODE SHAPES OF STRUCTURE FW-2
1.5
149
0.50
o.
FW-l. AUN-l
(MAX. ACC.=O.55G)
-0.5
BRSE ACCELERATION,
o.
-20.
BRSE SHEAR RESPONSE. KN

EXPERIMENTAL
COMPUTED
-30.J
BRSE OVERTURNING M3MENT, KN-M
TIME,
FIG. 6. 10
RESPONSE
SEC
\~AVEFORr1S
FOR STRUCTURE FW-l, RUN-l
150
o.
-1.0
,.
,,'
ACCELERATION AT LEVEL 10,
MM.
I'
o.
-20.
PLACEMENT AT LEVEL 1(1
EXPERIMENTAL
- - COMPUTED
o.
-20.
SHEAR FORCE ON WALL AT LEVEL 1,
I
n
1
J,
TIME,
SEC
STRUCTURE FW-1, RUN 1
KN.
151
1. 00
--t't+t-t-l:-m-t-+t-+-H-1-+++--- AT LEV EL 1 a.
( EXPEA JMENTAL)
~COMPUTED )
ACCELERATION FOR STRUCTURE
FW~l, RUN~l
152
"".
20.0
nT LEVEL
t~
RT LEVEL 8
-al.
20.0
-20.
0.00
o.
AA6~AA~L
VVl] VV1JV V
RT LEVEL 6.
A~66AAA(
VVVVITVVV
RT LEVEL"
"A!JA6~OL
OITVVVVV
V
RT LEVEL 2
-20.
-al.
to.o
0.00
o.
-10.0
-10.
5.00
o.
0.00
-5.0
-6.
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
I
0
3
TI"E.
(EXPEAIMENTAL)
SEC
(COMPUTEO)
DISPLACEMENT FOR STRUCTURE FW-l, RUN-l

153
Wall shear
Story shear
o.
. 1
f-.,if-+.-lf~f"-+++-+--9~--
AT LEV EL 1(1
Kif.
RT LEVEL "7
Kif.
RT LEVEL 5
KN.
RT LEVEL 3
KN.
RT LEVEL 1.
KN.
-10.
10.0
o.
0.00
O.
-10.0
-10.
20.0
0.00
O.
-20.0
20.0
-20.
0.00
O.
-20.0
-20.
20.0
o.
-20.
-20.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
o
TIME.
.( EXPEA I HENl AL)
(COMPUTED)
SHEAR FORCE FOR STRUCTURE FW-l, RUN-l

SEC
154
o.
FW-ll1 RUN-3
(MAX. Ace. -2 .ll 1G)
-2.0
B SE ACCELEAATION,
O.
-ijO.
BASE SHEAR RESPONSE, KN

---- EXPERIMENTAL
ceHPUTEO
o.
I
I I
: I
I I
I'f
-ijO.
BASE OVERTUANING MOMENT, KN-H
TIME,
FIG. 6.11
SEC
RESPONSE WAVEFORMS FOR STRUCTURE FW-l, RUN-3
155
-5.0
ACCELERATION AT LEVEL
1~
Su.ue-
u.
I
I
I
I
- 'i u .
,,
I
0f~PLACEMENT
,I
"./
AI LEVEL 10, MM.
EXPERIMENTAL
C~MPUTED
o.
-40.lJfJ
SHEAR FORCE ON WALL AT LEVEL 1,

I
I
1
TIME,
SEC
STRUCTURE FW-1, RUN-3

KN.
156
0.50
o.
FW-2. AUN-l
(MAX. ACC. -0. L!SG)
-o.s
BASE
ACCELEAATr~N,
BASE SHEAR RESPONSE, KN
---- EXPERIMENTAL
~
COMPUTED
o.
-30.u-o
BASE
~VEATUANrNG
I
1
FIG. 6.12
2
TIME,
MOMENT, KN-MM .
I
3
SEC
RESPONSE WAVEFORMS FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-1
157
1.00
o.
-1.0
ACCELERATIO~
R1 LEVEL lU
"
II
,I,
1\
.,.
-20.
DISPLACEMENT AT LEVEL lU
20.0
MM.
EXPERIMENTAL
COMPUTED
o.
-20.
SHEAR
F~RCE
~N
TIME,
STRUCTURE
SEC
FW~2,
RUN-1
WALL AT LEVEL 1,
KN.
158
G
1.00
'1
1'\
V'rV V'v \
0 f\
Dt'\ oA
RT LEVEL 9
-~~Vt+'vrt-tV-t-tV-t-tV~~V-.,c.4-- AT LEVEL 8.
-G.
AT LEVEL 6
-0.50
0.0
1.0
3.0
2.0
.( EXPEA I HENT RL)
(COMPUTED)
ACCELERATION FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-1

159
0.50
0.50
o.
AT LEVEL 5.
-a. SO
O.SO
o.
-o.S
-a. so
o.
RT LEVEL 3
0..50.,.
I
I
AT LEVEL 2
-o.S
RT LEVEL 1.
TIME.
(COMPUTEO)
(EXPERIHEN1RL)
ACC~LERATIONS
SEC
FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-l
160
nT LEVEL 1'1
0.00
liT LEVEL 8
-aJ.0
:20.0
-20.
JAA~f\
U1J\[V
VVV
0.00
-20.0
RT LEVEL 8.
-20.
10.0
0.00 1---d+HH-+-++-I--+-/-+-,f.-Ir-/-l
AT LEVEL II.
-10.0
5.00
AT LEVEL 2
-5.00
0.0
t.O
2.0
3.0
2
TII'tE.
(EXPEAIMENTAL)
(C6HPUTED)
DISPLACEMENTS FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-1

SEC
161
Wall shear
Story shear
SHEAR
KH.
~r1EAFl ~'"
WALL
KH.
VViri~
RT LEVEL 9
20.01
AT LEVEL 5
o.
~..l
20.0j
-2D.O
20.0
IInAQf'\
-"""I:'O~'r+v+CJI"J.4V--+-la-V+4""'-"-:--~V-:r-- AT LEV EL 3
0'1
-20.
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0 :
3
TIME.
(EX PEA I MENTAL)
( COMPUTED)
SHEAR FORCES FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-l

SEC
(COMPUTED)
162
1.00
o.
FW-2. AUN-2
(MAX. ACC.-O.92Gl
-1.0
BASE ACCELEAATION,
o.
-20.
BASE SHEAA AESPONSE. KN
EXPERIMENTAL
- - COMPUTED
-30.ak
BASE OVEATUANING MOMENT, KN-M
I
1
FIG. 6.13
2
TIME,
I
S
SEC
RESPONSE WAVEFORMS FOR STRUCTURE FW-2t RUN-2
163
2.00
o.
-2.0
1~
o.
-50.
DISPLACEMENT AT LEVEL
30.0
1~
MM.
EXPERIMENTAL
COMPUTED
o.
-30.J
a
SHEAR
I
1
F~RCE
TIME,
6N
3
SEC

WALL
AT
LEVEL
1,
KN.
164
G
2.00
'VV V V
AT LEVEL 8.
AT LEVEL 8.
AT LEVEL".
AT LEVEL 2.
-1.00
1.CO
o.
-1.00
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
(EXPERIMENTAL)
I'
2
TII1E,
:3
(COMPUTED)
ACCELERATIONS FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-2

SEC
, 165
.....
RT LEVEL tQ.
oAf\
f\~ f\
.....o-Prl-Q-+u-f-JrV-+-~vf--\-V-J~\.-- RT LEVEL
-50.0
50.0
RT LEVEL 8
-50.0
al.O
RT LEVEL II.
-20..0
10.0
RT LEVEL 2
-10.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
o
TIME.
(EXPERIMENTAL)
(COMPUTED)
DISPLACEMENTS FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-2

FIG.
SEC
6~13
(continued)
166
Wall shear
Story shear
O.
AT LEVEL
1~
KII.
-10.
IC.O
o.
-/ ,'1
..
..
I,'~
"
y"
,.
;."
f
"
Al LEVEL 9.
KII.
Al LEVEL "I.
KII.
AT LEVEL S.
KII.
Al LEVEL 3.
KII.
AT LEVEL 1.
Kif.
."
-20.
2il.O
-2D.~
..
~.:ll
~.
J'
: t
It
\: '-'4
~.()-
-;;0. )
0.0
1.0
3.0
(EXPEAIMENTAL}
(C~HPUTEO )
SHEAR FORCES FOR STRUCTURE FW-2, RUN-2

167
o.
FW-2, AUN-2
(HAX ~ ACC. =0. 92Gl
-1.0
BASE ACCELEAATION,
o.
-20.
BASE SHEAA AESP6NSE, KN
---- Hyste~esis Model 2

---- Hysteresis Model 1
-30.
BASE OVEATUANING H6HENT, KN-H
TIME.
FIG.
6.14
SEC
RESPONSE WAVEFORMS FOR STRUCTURE R1-2, RUN-2

USING HYSTERESIS MODELS 1 AND 2
168
o.
-2.0
1~
DISPLACEMENT AT LEVEL
1~
"H.
o.
-50.
---- HysteresiS Model 2

---- Hysteresis Model 1
\Tv
o.
\fQ~
~yC
'I
-30.
SHEAA
FOACE ON
WALL
I------~------~I------+I---
2
TIME,
SEC
AT
LEVEL 1
KN.
FLEXURAL
H~HENT.
FLEXURAL HDHENT, KN-H.
KN-H.
f"-I. JIIUN-I
IItRX. ACC.-O.55DJ
f"-I. JIIUN-3
&I)
'"AX. ACC.-i.fIIGJ
Leve,Sr+ ~
11'1
11'1
0.05
0.12
0.18
0.21&
0.18
0.21&
())
\.0
AlHATION h.O.025 IU. AAO.
AOTATION (NO.025 IU. AAO.
c:iI
~j
I
FIG. 6.15
0
N
0
I
MOMENT~ROTATION RELATIONSHIPS OF THE FLEXURAL SPRING

AT THE 5TH LEVEL LEFT EXTERIOR BEAM
fLEXURAL HOHENT. KN-H.

o
fll-2. RUM-t
'11-2. RUM-2
'"AX. IICC. -0. ~1'01
'MAX. ACC. -0. 12GI

11'1
Level 5
-b.20
-D. IS
O~05
O~ 10
:r- + ~
O~
IIi
0.20
-".20
c:i
-O.IS
0.10
0.15
0-.20
-.I
'-J
ROTATION (NO.025ij). AAD.
ROTAT I ON (NO. 025 1U. RAD.
L-----,
o
c:iI
c:iI
fLEXURAL HQHENT. KN-H.
fLEXURAL HOMENT. KN-H.

o
,.. ,. """-,
'''-2. "UN-'
OIAX. ACC.-O.fllt
t.:I~
..,;
0.10
ROTATI ON
...
,
O. IS
(NO. 02S~).
0.20
+~
. . . . .-c';.-O.llo)
6.20
In
~~I~
-b.ly=M~:iO
RAD.
ROT AT I ON
...
o
I
FIG. 6.16
MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIPS OF THE FLEXURAL SPRING

USING HYSTERESIS MODELS 1 AND 2 AT THE
5TH LEVEL LEFT EXTERIOR BEAM
0'. IS
(NO. 02S~).
0'.20
RAD.
""-..J
fLEXURAL HOHENT, KN-H.
o
fN-I.
'"-1.
RUM-t
o
RUM-I
'""X. ACC.-2. IUIi)
'"AX. ACC.-a.sSG.
II)
II)
...
o
O~OI
O~O2
o~os
o~o
-....I
..
0.02
ROTATION (NO.025ij). RAD.

~
I
oI
Q
FIG. 6.17
0.08
o~.oe
RaTATION (NO.02Sij). RAD.
O~O"
MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIPS OF A FLEXURAL SPRING

AT THE BASE OF THE LEFT COLUMN
'"
fLEXURAL MOMENT, KN-M.
fLEXURAL MOMENT, KN7M.
fll-2. RUN-2
fll-2. flUM-l
I"RX. ALe. -0. "81l1
I"AX. RCC. -0.11201
U'l
...
~
o
-h.o"
-h.03
0.01
-h.02
0".02
0".03
0.02
O.Oij
0.03
0.05
0".06
--I
ROTAT ION (teO. 0251j). RAD.
ROTATION (NO.025 lU. RAD.
0I
:J
,[,
:,l,:J,
,.,
'-l
FLEXURAL MOMENT. KN-M.
o
."
fW-I, flUH-i
fW-l. flUM-t
I"RX. RCC. -0. s5GI
II111X. IICC.-2.I&'01
I:)
0.15
CURVATURE, t/H.
0-.20
CURVATURE. 1/H.
LQvel 1
o
o
~
--J
-.....J
+::a

o
".-2. ftUII-l
fN-2. "UN-2
II)
o
."
IIIIIK. flCC.O .I2GI
'"RK. RCC O.... GI
O~
10
O~
15
0-.20
CURVATURE. l/H.
FIG. 6.18
MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE FLEXURAL SPRING

AT THE BASE ELEMENT OF THE WALL
0-.15
0-.20
CURVATURE, l/H.
BRSE nVERTURNING HnHEHT. KH-H.
BRSE OVERTURNING HOHENT.
Ci
o
#I
'11-1. ftUM-1
'MAX. ACC.-0.55GI
KN-H.
'11-1. ftUM-3
o
'MAX. Att.-2.IUG)
..,
a
a
Q
Q
0.
-.....;J
01
- .. 0.00
TOP STnRY DISPLRCEMENT. HH.
-SO.OO
./ / ' // . / / . /
y~
Q
Q
N
I
..,
Q
..,o
o
o
Q
#I
FIG. 6.19
:II
I
BASE OVERTURNING MOMENT VS. TOP-STORY DISPLACEMENT

RELATIONSHIPS OF THE STRUCTURES
TOP STORY DISPLRCEMENT. HH.
BASE
~VERTURNING
BASE
HOHENT. KN-H.
KN-H.
o
o
ci
:11
='
""-2, ftUM-2
f"-2. RUII-t
I""X. Ace D.... GI
OVERT~RNING H~HENT.
IMAX. IIce.o. 121i1
..,ci
o
o
o
PI
o
o
o
o
ci
N
-~O.OO
60.00
-60.00
-SO.OO
T~P
"-J
STORY DISPLACEHENT. HH.
T~P ST~RY
N
I
o
a
o
o
o
o
..,
PI
o
o
a
a
a
:r
:r
80.00
DISPLACEMENT. HH.
en
0.50
FW-l, AUN-l
2.00
o.
o.
-0.5
-2.0
FW-l. RUN-3
BRSE ACCELERATION, G
(MAX. ACC.-O.55Gl
COMPRESSION
BASE ACCELEAATlcrN, G
(MAX. ACC. =2.l!lGl
15.0
-......,J
. -......,J
o.
o.
-15.
-15.
TENSION
AXIAL fORCE Of 1ST COL., KN
AXIAL fORCE Of 1ST COL . KN

I
____ 1
2
TIME,
FIG. 6.20
-~~
--I
S
SEC
1I
RESPONSE WAVEPORMS FOR AXIAL FORCE

AT THE BASE OF THE LEFT COLUMN
2I
TIME,
SEC
0.,50
FW'-2,
FW-2. AUN-l
o.
o.
-0.5
-1.0
BASE ACCELERATION, G
(MAX. ACC.O.~9G)
COMPRESS I~'N
BASE
AUN-2
ACCELEAATI~N,
(HAX.
ACC.~O.92G)
15.0
--I
""-'
co
o.
o.
Hysteresis Model 1
Hysteresis Model 2
-15.
-15.
TENSION
AXIAL FORCE OF 1ST COL., KN
AXIAL FORCE OF 1ST COL., KN

~
I
1
I
2
TIME,
I
3
.- . - - - --
SEC
. T
2
TIME
3
J
SEC
179
Level
10
0
9
T=1.716 sec.
,0----0 1
Q
.0---<) I
0T=1.340
10--0 1
Q
Q
[ ) T= 1.332
,0---0,
T= 1.328
.0--0
Q
o
5
,O--Or
.o--<)r
@ T= 1.924
2
CD
I I
I 0--0 [
0
.0--0
,0---0 r
0
0 ~-
CD
I
CD
-.
0
- ----- ---
10---<)1
0
Q
T=I.356
10--0,
Q
Q
(0
,O--OL
Q
1 <>--0 (
------------ ------------------
0 ~-----
Sub-
1-------
Element
0
"'--1------f-0 ~----~-----
~-----
----------1-0---------~-----
T=I.932
------
------
G)
,0---0 r
T=1.908
10--<)1
-.
.Q
T=1.556
I 0--0 [
Q
Q
T=1.360
(@)
JO--Or
Q
Q
T=I.712
1~1
Q
Q
11 I
~----.
G) T= 1.168
4
T= 1.340
T =I.548
lC>--<).
------------- -------1-----~-----
~-----
T= 1.912 <:1'"/ / / / /
/////////
77///"/7/
//////////
L. Ext. Col.
Int. Col.
R. Ext. Col.
FIG. 6.21
COMPUTED STRUCTURAL YIELD PATTERNS

(STRUCTURE FW-l, RUN~l)
12)
////////,'//////
Wall
180
Level
T =0.848 sec.
T= 1.376
..............- _ 0--0....--__
10
___---.0--0 - - - - -
----0 - - - -
.....----.0--0--.......
~----.
L. Ext. Col.
0--0....-_...
Int. Col.
STRUC', ~~E FW-1, RUN-3
R. Ext. Col.
Wall
181
Level
I
10
(7)
9
T=O .880 sec.
0--0 ...---~ 1 - - -...... 0--0...---....

J
Q
Q
Q
T=O.864
I
Q
0---<)----
868
T=O. 0
--0--I
II
Q
0--0 _ - - - - - -... ~ . . - - -___ o~--oO . . . . - - - -
T=I.988
--_0--0...--.......
---0--0--...
CD
0--0...--..........._--0--0--......
L. Ext. Col.
o--~
o--~
0--0 _ - _....._ - - 0 - - 0 - -........
0---
o~--o
0---0 - - _....._ - -
I
Q
0--0 - - _. . . .. . - - - - 0---0
--~.
0--00
.....---0--0 --.. . .
404
CD T= I. 0--0----.
...
o--~
T=O. 860
CD T=O.856
0---
I
Q
---o--o--~
Int. Col.
0---
R. Ext. Col.
STRUCTURE FH-2, RUN-1

FIG. 6,21 (continued)
Wall
182
Level
10
T=0.872 sec.
10--0,
T=0.832
.0---0.Q
Q
o ,0--0,
II
T=0.828
.0--<> I
0
.0--0.
IO--Or
11 II
T=O.868
T=O.844
Q
CD
I
.0
f------
-----.. -- ---
-----~----
1<>--0 1
Q
10---<) r
0-.
JO--Or
Q
Q
,0--0.
Q
.0--0,
Q
(0 T=0.848
10--0 1
11 II
0
0
lO---<>r
Q
l0--0r
0
CD
0 ~-----
--- ---
------,
0 -----~
--- - ---
------
----------Ele~
-----...0
-----
----------0
-----
------
T=O.840
10--0.
0
Q
10--0.
Q
Q
Sub-
~-----
CD T=0.836
2
G)
10--0 I
CD T=0.852
I
-0
~-----
0 ~----~-----
,<>--Or
)0--0 I
.0---0, CD
Q
-------- -------------
T=O.860 r ..;.
. .-'., ~
_ - .,', ....
10
i~g:g~6\>;;;;;> 2
///// '///
/////////
//////////
L. Ext. Col.
I nt. Col.
R. Ext. Col.
~TRUCTURE
FW-2, RUN-2
////////////.~
Wall
183
(Not To Scale)
FIG. 6.22
OBSERVED CRACK PATTERNS IN

Abrams & Sozen [2J
20~-----------r-----------r----------~----------~----------~----------~----------~
16
~il:k
CD
FW-2
12
o Beam
Q)
.s::.
cu
va
Yielding Storts
tJ. Wall Yielding Starts
(f)
Applied
Load
o Column
Yielding Starts
00
- - - 0 Concentrated Spring Model
,.f::o.!
- . Layered Model
CD
'IIi
Cracking Storts
---- Base Shear
10
0&
20
3b
40
50
6'0
Top Floor Displacement (8), M M
FIG. 6.23
BASE SHEAR VS. TOP~STORY DISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIPS OF STRUCTURE FW-2

USING CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL AND LAYERED MODEL
70
-.. D
0.6.-
51 x 38 (2.0" x 1.5")
EC
=0.003 feu = 0.004
6-No.13g
Wire
N = 17.80 kN (4.0 kips)
05
E
I
04
II
N =8.90 (2.0)
.....
t:
Q)
0
~
0.3 U1I1
IIIC
0)
t:
-0
t:
Q)
CD
"
"~
Primary curve
.L"
O.l~
N=O
N=-2.23(-0.5)
.......
Axial force decreasing
N = 2.23 (0.5)
'"
02
"''
N = 4.45 (/.0)
N =-4.45 (-1.0)
.............
OL-
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Curvature, 1/ M
FIG. 6.24
MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE LAYERED SECTION

AT THE BASE OF THE COLUMNS
1.2
--I
co
<.Jl
30
2&
loodln9
O.,ect Ion
20
15
Z
.lIC
CD
0
...
0
10
Esy
--i
co
l.L.
0
Yielding Line,
0"1
Nn : 5.5 _ Dead Load
Ultimate Line
Ecu
)(
0.3
0.4
. -,
------~----r--
0.5
Moment, kN - m
-10
No = - 9.3
-15
FIG. 6.25
LOADING PATH AT THE BASE OF THE EXTERIOR COLUMNS
0.6
187
..
16
'-
oQ)
.J::.
Concentrated Spring
Model
CJ)
- - Layered Model
-100
-80
-20
40
Top Floor
Displacement
-8
-12
FIG. 6.26

OF STRUCTURE FW-2 USING CONCENTRATED SPRING MODEL
AND LAYERED MODEL FOR SINGLE CYCLE OF LOADING
188
N =13.35 kN (3.0 kips)
E
I
Q4
.x
.....
c:
Q)
0.3
N =4.45 (1.0)
Q2
N=O
N =- 2.23 (-0.5)
,--t:
"
------ --
~0.24
I
L ___
N =-4.45 (-/.0)
-0.16
N=-6.78
Curvature
11M
N=-4.45
N=-2.23-----N=O
N = 2.23
N =4.45
-0.3
N =8.90
-0.4
N =13.35
-0.5
FIG. 6.27
MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE LAYERED SECTION

AT THE BASE OF THE COLUMNS FOR SINGLE CYCLE OF LOADING
Ii
04
nu
~I.
01
1I
Q.I
38 (20.U,
i- No. 1311 Wire
S.clioft Lay.red
(!)
(9
[[
OU
016
. 3C
-01
Yi.1d1ne
Q)- CheckiftQ Poi""
-f
"00.07
No - 2 .
.. 00.03
6.5I::
Both 90 .. Tllliion
4.4 C
No .,
T
[l~~-o~:~ [l~~:~~
( Tlnlion'
33,8
[~O-002
THOU
[~'-Ol!!
T Noe .2
200[
[
r
[~'H-~:;
T
~OO'O!! (TInI@r:::..oo.12
~NOO
-~.4
-0.4
-011
BEHAVIOR OF THE LAYERED SECTION AT THE BASE

OF THE COLUMNS FOR SINGLE CYCLE OF LOADING
N o-4.2
FIG. 6.28
-j=
4.4 C
13.2 [
!lLS
~"00'09
r(!)(T:::'
6.J C
r~O-006
T H'~I
411 r:
. -rNo-3.4
3l!!
(ComcIG)'ioIIl
, \W.-007
NOO
@)
-01
~.0'01
- - - AclllQl .. -~ Curv.
---- Us.d
. - *. . . . .[ *. .
"00 kN-tll
by 20
)-Ho-2D
-4.1C
......
00
1.0
190
APPENDIX A
DETAILS OF STIFFNESS MATRICES
A.l
Frame Member Stiffnesses
A. 1 . 1 Local Coordinates
Kll
MA
MI
B
K2l
K22
l N'
eA
K12
: 1
K33
J 8:. J
A. 1 .2 Global Coordinates
PA
uA
VA
vA
MA
wA
uB
= Km
PB
vB
VB
MB
wB
A.l.3 Column Members
o
= Kc = - - - - "m
J
_1-
__
(j = 1,
rv
3)
191
where
jC 2 = I (K 11 + K21 ) + If EK
2
jC 3 = K11 + 2A(K 11 + K12 ) + A EK
1
A
jC 4 = I (K 12 + K22 ) + I EK
jC 5
K12 + AEK + A EK
jC 6 = K22 + 2A(K12 + K22 ) + A2EK

A.1.4
Beam Members (Fixed-Hinged Members)
for j = 1, 2
for j
v
A
where
;b, = K,,/
= 3
=0
192
A.2 Wall Member Stiffness

Local Coordinates
A. 2.1
Kbb = Fab
-1 =
Kl
K2
K3
K3
K4
Wl
-W2
-Wl
-W4
Wo
-Wo
W3
W2
Wl
W5
W
4
Wo
Global Coordinates
A.2.2
Km = Kw =
Sym.
W6
(W o is neglected in this study)
where
Wo
K,
Wl
W2
K2
LK2 - K3
W3 = K2L2 - 2K3L + K4
W4 =
W5
K3
= LK3 - K4
W6 = K4
193
A.3
Connectivity Matrix, LA]
Wall
Rotation
Frame
Vertical Displacement and Rotation
i -1
i-lth story
i
ith story
8
8
1 vA 18A 2vA 28A 38A l vB 18B 2vB 28B 38B w A w B
K
c,
PA
VA
t1A
PB
i i -1
uA uB
1
1
1
1
1
VB
Me
1
1
PA
VA
Kc
2
Story
Horiz.
Displ.
~~A
1
1
PB
VB
r~B
1
I
Kc
3
Kb
Kb
Kb
2
3
Kw
PA
MA
PB
MB
VA
MA
VA
MA
MA
PA
MA
PB
MB
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
194
A.4 Story Stiffness Matrix, K;

[ 1vA
I ~:~
c. A I
8
2 A
8
3 A
= K.1
(;=10,\;1)
(Fig. 4.5)
wMB
.S2',
- - - - -
; R1
-;R 2
.W5', -i W
2
iR2
W
i 2
,W6', -i W4
i 4
K.
-;R 1
0
-
1.
Sym.
14 x 14
'95
where
r ' Co + , b,
,b 2
, C3 + , b3
-2 b2
is, =
2CO+ 2b,
2C3 + 2b 3
Sym.
l
-,Co
i 2 =
3C3 + 2.3 b3
'C 5
-2 CO
2C5
i R,
=~
'C 4
, ;R2 =
0
L
3"2
.W n = Wn
1 \..2
.,C..,
3C5
,co
'C 6
2CO
2C6
, i S3 =
Sym.
Sym.
2C4
3C4
3C6
196
A.5 Structural Stiffness Matrix

A. 5. 1 General Expression
FF
Fw
FH
Al
Rl
DF
A2
R2
D
w
RT
RT
2 E
70 x 70
where
{FF} = {fF;} =
lV i
1vi
1M;
lei
2V;
2v;
, {D F} = {fD;} =
2M;
26 i
3M;
3e i
{F } = { F.} = { M.}
W
W 1
W 1
{F }
H
= {h F.}
= {hP.}
1
1
{~}
= {hDi} = {hui}
(i
= 10
IV
1)
197
A.5.2
[A, ]
(50 x 50)
;
... ... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ....
... ...
0
... ...
....... ....
... ...
... ...
...
;+,5 2 , ;+,5 3 + ; 5, , i S2
... ...
... ...
........ ...
... ......
... ...
... ...
... ... ...
... ...
... ...
...
... ...
... ......
...
... ...
...
....
.S. (5 x 5)
A.5.3
('0
[A 2]
'0)
;
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
...
...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
...
... ...
... ...
.~
... ...
... ...
...
;+,W 5 , i+,W 6 + i W3' ;W5
198
A.5.4
[ R11
(50 x 10)
..: , ,
" , ,,
,,
,,
" " ,
,,
,
... ,
,
"
...
,
" ... , ,
"', ,
" ,,
......
...
-;+l R2' i+1 R2 - ; R, , ;R,

,,
,
,
" ,
' ... , ,
,,
... , ,
, ...
" ...
" ,,
...
,
" , " ... ,
" ,,
"
,
.R. = (5 x
J
A.5.5
[ R2J
(10 x 10)
r ... ... ... , ...... , , , ... , ... ,

... ...
... ...
... ,
... ...
.... ....
... ....
.... ,
... ...
... ,
i
, ....
,,
...... ,
, ....
0
.... ...
, ...
...
-i+'W 4 , i+,W 4 - i W2' ;W2

' .......
o
A.5.6
"',
...
,,
....
', ....
', ....
'
"',
....
'
'
....
' ....... ...

....
"
(10 x 10)
o
o
"
' .......
'''''''',
199
APPENDIX B
COMPUTER PROGRAt,1 FOR NONLINEAR RESPONSE ANALYSIS OF
REINFORCED CONCRETE FR~1E-WALL STRUCTURES
The computer program is developed for nonlinear analysis of reinforced
concrete frame-wall structures subjected to static and dynamic loadings.
The program can be used to obtain frequencies and mode shapes of the
structure.
Both elastic analysis and inelastic analysis of either static
or dynamic loadings can be performed.

in Chapter 4.
The method of analysis is described
The program is written in the FORTRAN IV computer language
on the CYBER 175 computer furnished by the Digital Computer Laboratory of

the University of Illinois.
The size of the structure that can be analyzed
can he increased by appropriate changes in the dimensioning statements.

But it this stage, the program is applicable to structures in the form of
10-story regular rectangular plane frame-wall systems with an isolated
shed! wall.
The total core space required for the program is approximately
1115008 CM STORAGE in addition to temporary disk space in which calculated

response values are stored.
It took approximately 100 CP SECOND EXECUTION
TIME on the CYBER 175 computer for the program to complete a response
analysis of this 10-story structure subjected to 3.0 seconds of base
motion at a 0.0004 second integration time interval (with calculating new
stiffness of the structure at every ten times, 0.004 second).
The flow diagram of the computer program for nonlinear response
analysis of reinforced concrete frame-wall systems is shown in Fig. B.l.
200
Material Properties
Structural Geometries
Stiffness Properties of Members
Coefficients of Hysteresis Rules
Initialize
All Variables
Initial Member Stiffness Matrices, K~j' Kcj '

Initial Story Stiffness Matrices, Ki
Initial Structural Stiffness Matrix
Reduce Initial Structural Stiffness Matrix, KH
FIG. B.l
FLOW DIAGRAM OF COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR NONLINEAR

RESPONSE ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE
FRAME-WALL SYSTEMS
201
1-----1
Compute & Print
Modal Characteristics of the Structure

Frequencies, Mode Shapes
1 Read
Static Loading Data

Dynamic Loading Data (Base Input Acceleration Records)
Step Routine Start
Compute
Incrementa 1 External Forces, {~FH}
Ot'
Incremental Structural Responses from

Structural Stiffness Matrix
FIG. B.l (continued)
{.&y \
20~~
Static Case
{~DH} = IKHI-l{~FHl
Dynamic case (equations of motion)
{~X }
= [A] - 1 {B }
Compute
Incremental and Total Member Forces
Incremental and Total Member Displacements
New Stiffnesses for Beam, Column and Wall Members

Based on Hysteresis Rules
New Reduced Structural Stiffness Matrix
Store & Print

In Disk
Structural Response Values
Member Forces and Member Displacements
Maximum and Minimum Structural

Response Values
FIG. B.1 (continued)
203
APPENDIX C
NOTATION
All
introduced.
symbols
used
in
the
text are defined when they are first
For convenience, they have been listed below.
coefficient
in the hysteresis model 2, or constant (=0.5) in
the hysteresis rule
area of a cross section
[A] = dynamic stiffness matrix, or connectivity matrix
As = area of tensile reinforcement

AI = area of compressive reinforcement
s
b
{B}
width of the cross section
= dynamic
= depth
load matrix
of the neutral axis
c = distance from the neutral axis to the point

l
of
the
maximum
tensile stress of concrete
C1 , C2 = coefficients for damping matrix
[C] = transformation
matrix
damping matrix, or
from
local to global coordinates, or
instantaneous
damping
evaluated at the end of previous step
C
c
= concrete
compression force
C = steel compression force

I
matrix
which
is
204
= distance from extreme compression fiber to
the
centroid
of
axial load
= distance
from
extreme
compressive
fiber
to the center of
compressive
fiber
to the center of
tensile reinforcement
d'
= distance
from
extreme
compressive reinforcement
o=
total
depth
of a section, or diameter of a reinforcing bar,
or displacement variable in the hysteresis moel 2
Dc
cracking displacement of the unit length of
0, = maximam deflection attained in the direction
a cantilever
of
loading
beam
in
the hysteresis rule
Do = displacement value on the x coordinate which is obtained by

using the slope Ku in the hysteresis model 2
0y
= yielding
deflection in the hysteresis rule
{OF}' {Ow} = displacement
vector
frame term, wall term
(except of holizontal displacement

in
the
structural
stiffness
of
matrix,
respectively
{OH}
= horizontal
D(M)
= free
E ..
lJ
displacement vector
end displacement of a cantilever beam
= transformatjon
matrix of an element ij of the multiple spring
model
ES = modulus of elasticity of steel

Esh
= modulus
to
define
stiffness
in
strain hardening range of
steel
= inelastic
EA
= axial rigidity of a section
modulus of reinforcement after yielding
205
EI
= initial flexural rigidity
rigidity
of
before
cracking,
from cracking
to
yielding, and after yielding ,respectively
EI.
instantaneous flexural rigidity of a layered section
Ely
ratio of flexural rigidity after yielding to before yielding
fc = stress of concrete
f' = compressive uniaxial strength of concrete
c
fL = instantaneous rotational flexibility

fen = concrete stress at which concrete strain is e
f
tensile strength of concrete
fs = stress of steel, or stress of tensile reinforcement

f'
stress of compressive reinforcement
yield stress of steel
ultimate stress of steel
rotational flexibility resulting from
f(M)
bond
slip,
inelastic
action over the beam length 1,
f b (M)
flexibility due to bond slippage
[f]
flexibility matrix of a cantilever beam
flexibility matrix of a cantilever beam ab
[F .. ]
flexibility
[F
ab
lJ
matrix
of
an element ij of the multiple spring
model
[F M] = horizontal force vector of a structure
[FF]' [Fw] =
[F]
force vector of frame term, wall term, respectively

instantaneous flexibility matrix
GA = elastic shear rigidity of a section
GA. =
1
shear rigidity of ;
element
206
I9
= moment
= primary
= new
of inertia of a gross section

slope of system in the hysteresis rule
unloading slope in the hysteresis rule
~ = member stiffness matrix in global coordinates

KCj ' Kbj , Kw = column, beam, and wall member stiffness matrices, respectively
[K ] = reduced
H
structural
stiffness
matrix
of
number
size,
of
stories by number of stories
K; = story
stiffness matrix
= length
=
of a flexible element in a simple beam
length of subelement k of the multiple spring model
L = length of a beam, or development length of bond stress, or

length of a cantilever beam
6L = elongation of reinforcing steel
Lp
= length
of the inelastic zone of the layered model
,
N.,) = bending moment
m = lumped mass at the story i
m(;,
= bending
function in the layered model
moment, 9r moment variable in the hysteresis model 2
Me' My' Mu = cracking, yielding, and ultimate moment( moment
at
concrete
strain equal to 0.004), respectively

~MA
6M
A,
6M
= incremental
B = incremental
moment at the fixed end of a cantilever beam

moments at the ends of a flexible line element of
a simple beam
6M ,
A
~B
= incremental
end moments of a member, or
incremental jOint moments in global coordinates
[M]
diagonal mass matrix
number of story
207
axial load acting on a section

incremental axial force
incremental applied force vector, applied force vector at the
tip of a cantilever beam, respectively
incremental horizontal forces in global coordinates
R(M)
rotation
due
to
reinforcements
slip at the fixed end of a
cantilever beam at which moment of M is developed
so.1
= instantaneous
stiffness
of the concentrated spring model of
unit length
T = steel tension force, or transformation matrix

T; = i-th period of a structure
~~
time interval
average bond stress
~UA' ~UB
incremental lateral displacement in global coordinates
{~Ub}'
{U b} = incremental displacement vector, displacement vector
at
the
tip of a cantilever beam, respectively

~VA' ~VB
incremental vertical forces in global coordinates
~VA'
incremental vertical displacement in global coordinates
~VB
~WN ~WB,~eA,~8B=
{X},
{x}
incremental joint rotation in global coordinates

relative story velocity and acceleration vector at the end of
previous step, respectively
{~x},{~x},{~x}
relative
incremental
story
displacement,
volocity,
and
acceleration vector, respectively

{~y}
incremental base acceleration vector
Yt = distance from neutral axis of a section to extreme

tension
fiber
in
208
Z = constant
which
defines
the
descending
slope
of
the
stress-strain curve of concrete
= reduction
facter for shear rigidity (=0.5)
S = constant of the Newmark S method

AC
= distance
from
extreme
compression
fiber
to
centroid
of
concrete compression force
= axial strain of a
= incremental axial
S
~S
scu
se
sn
c
c
c
c..o,c..t''-y'c..
u
= strain
section
strain
of concrete
= concrete strain of 0.004
= concrete
= concrete
= concrete
strain on the envelope curve

plastic strain
strain
at
which
f~
, ft' fy' and fu are attained,
respectively
ssh
= steel
strain at which strain hardening of steel commences
Ss
= steel
strain or tensile steel strain
s'
= compressive
~8
= rotation,
8,
steel strain
incremental
rotation
of
cantilever
beam,
respectively
68A,~eB,~8A,~eB
= incremental
rotations at the ends of a flexible line element,
at the supported joints of a simple beam, respectively
fA e}
A
= incremental joint rotation vector
= ratio
of the length of a rigid portion to that of a flexible
element for a simple beam

Ak = damping factor of the k-th mode
= curvat ure
209
<Pc, <P y ' cf>u
= curvature
at cracking, yielding, and ultimate, respectively
, = incremental
cf>.
curvature
circular frequency of the k-th mode

k=

001 Srs 457

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

001 Srs 457

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

~/V

SERIES NO. 457

Metz Reference Room

ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE

A Report on a Research Project

THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Mstz Reference Room

3. Recipient's Accession No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Frame-Wall

Katsuhiko Emori and William C. Schnobrich

8. Performing Or~anization Rept.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

11. Contract/Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address

National Science Foundation

15. Supplementary Notes

The nonlinear response and failure mechanism of reinforced concrete

17. Key Words and Document Analysis.

Nonlinear dynamic analysis, Earthquake engineering, Hysteresis loops,

17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms

17c. COSATI Field/Group

ENDORSED BY ANSI AND UNESCO.

19 . Security Class (This

21. -No. of Pages

STRUCTURAL SYSTEM AND MECHANICAL MODELS ------------------------ 8

Structural System ----------------------------------------- 8

FORCE-DEFORMATION RELATIONSHIPS FOR CANTILEVER BEAM MODELS ----- 13

Introductory Remarks -------------------------------------- 1

Introductory Remarks -------------------------------------- 13

ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE ------------------------------------------- 31

HYSTERESIS RULES AND NUMERICAL EXAMPLES ------------------------54

Introductory Remarks --------------------------------------61

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ---------------------------------------- 78

7.2 Conclusions ----------------------------------------------- 79

7.3 Recommendations for Further Studies ----------------------- 80

COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR NONLINEAR RESPONSE ANALYSIS

REINFORCING SCHEDULES FOR THE STRUCTURES OF FW-l AND FW-2 ------ 86

ASSUMED CHARACTERISTICS OF A CANTILEVER BEAM SPECIMEN

ASSUMED CHARACTERISTICS OF A BEAM-COLUMN JOINT SPECIMEN

ASSUMED CHARACTERISTICS OF A CANTILEVER WALL SPECIMEN

SUMMARY OF ASSUMED ANALYTICAL CONDITIONS FOR

ASSUMED MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES ---------- 95

CONFIGURATIONS OF THE STRUCTURES FW-1 AND FW-2 ----------------- 96

STIFFNESS PROPERTIES OF CONSTITUENT MEMBERS

MAXIMUM RESPONSES OF FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES --------------------- 103

REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME-WALL TEST STRUCTURE ------------------ 110

REINFORCEMENT DETAILS OF STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS ----------------- 111

DEFORMATION MODES OF FRAME-WALL STRUCTURES --------------------- 113

CURVATURE DISTRIBUTION ALONG A CANTILEVER BEAM ----------------- 114

MECHANICAL MODELS USED IN INVESTIGATION ------------------------ 115

IDEALIZED STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS FOR CONCRETE AND STEEL

DISTRIBUTIONS OF STRESS AND STRAIN OVER A CROSS SECTION -------- 117

IDEALIZED MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP USED FOR THE

IDEALIZED MOMENT-ROTATION RELATIONSHIP USED FOR THE

IDEALIZED MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP FOR EACH SPRING

IDEALIZED STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS USED WITH THE

DISTR!SJTIJNS OF STRESS AND STRAIN OVER A CROSS SECTION

S MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS FOR

COMPUTED BOND SLIP WITH EXPERIMENTAL DATA -------- 124-

CURVES FOR INELASTIC ANALYSIS -------- 125