Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
[
[
-
]
I
_7
~7-7
Load
a
Figure I
80
hinges at the base of the columns is generally unavoidable. The excessive ductility demand imposed on columns
of so-called 'soft storeys', is evident from Figure lb. For
frames taller than three to four storeys, this nrechanisnr
should be avoided. Theret\)re cohnnns tnust be made
stronger than beams and this is etnphasized in tire seismic
provisions of most building codes. However, codes do not
specify ]row nmch stronger columns should be.
If sufficient reserve strength is provided in colunms with
respect to tire strength that can be developed in adjacent
beams, then, no matter what kind of ground tnotion occurs,
only the preferred nmchanisnr of Figure la can develop.
The choice o f a unique mode of energy dissipation in a
structure, such as the frames of b't~trc 1, during unpredictable severe ground motions, forms the core of the deterministic design philosophy postulated. Because the strength
that might be developed in the member deliberately made
weaker, is related to the required capacity of the stronger
component, the procedure that follows is referred to as
'capacity design'.
hr tnost tnultistorey frames the tnajor part, it not the
entire resistance of lateral R),ces, is assigned to structural
(shear) walls. Possible failure modes in cani ilever walls are
shown in Figure 2. The deterministic seismic design approach,
outlined above, distates that flexural yielding in the clearly
defined plastic binge zone shoukl control the design. As a
corollary to these requirements, failure due h) diagonal
tension, sliding along horizontal construction joints, as seen
in l:~urc 2, inadequate anchorage or splicing of tim reinforceurent, instability of concrete components or compression bars nrust be avoided, while large inelastic seismic
displacements are sustained by the structure. Consequently,
the capacity of the mechallisms listed above must be in
excess of the actions thai result when in the presence of
gravity loads energy dissipation due to flexural yielding
develops at the base of a cantilever wall.
A similar strength hieralchy must be established between
the superstructure and its foundations. For obvious reasons
damage in the components e r a reinforced concrete foundalion st ructure should be avoided. Also components of the
t\mndations are as a general rule less suitable for energy
dissipation because in deep nrenrbers it is more difficult to
achieve significant ductility due to flexural yielding. I lence,
in such situations it is necessary to ensure that tire foundation structure, while highly stressed, remains elastic when
the complete energy dissipating mechanism el tim superstructure, such as shown in Figure la, is mobilized. At tlris
stage structural actions applied to tire foundation structure
have little relation to the lateral and gravity loads used in
the initial elastic analysis. Rather it is the actions that have
been "squeezed' out of the inelastic superstruclure during a
very large displaceurent pulse, thai should control the
design of the foundation system.
As a matter of routine, a designer will ensure that the
specified loads are safely translnitted through the foundation structure into the supporting soil. [lowever, nruch
larger forces need to be transmitted when the chosen
energy dissipating mechanisms of the superstructure are
being fully developed. These actions cannot be based on
'characteristic' or 'reliable' strength properties. They must
be evaluated from properties that are 'recognized by earthquakes'. This necessitates the evaluation of a probable
upper bound value of the strength of the superstructure.
Many shear cores of high-rise buildings in seismic areas,
assumed to behave as ductile cantilever walls, such as those
t
D
Vf JNf
.///
IM
(a) Wall a c t i o n s
Ic
( b ) Flexure
(c)
(d) Sliding
shear
Diagonal
tension
(e)
H i n g e sliding
T h e p h i l o s o p h y o f c a p a c i t y design
In the capacity design of earthquake-resisting structures,
elements of primary lateral load resisting systems are
chosen and suitably designed and detailed for energy dissipation under severe inelastic deformations. All other
structural elements are provided with sufficient strength so
that the chosen means of energy dissipation can be maintained. 2'4 For example in beams of multistorey frames,
plastic hinges at points of maximum moments (Figure la)
are chosen and appropriately proportioned. Flexural reinforcement is then provided at all other sections of the span
in such a way that yielding cannot occur when the full
stength of the two plastic hinges due to an earthquake is
developed.
In order to evaluate the probable maximum moment;
that is the flexural overstrength; which can ever be
generated during a large seismic pulse, allowance must be
made for both the mean yield strength and the strain
hardening of the steel used. Therefore in seismic design it is
necessary to ascertain that steel with yield strengths in
excess of that specified is not used in the construction.
When the flexural overstrength of a beam is established, the
associated shear forces, including those due to gravity load
on the span, are readily determined. When a beam is
designed to resist this shear demand, an undesirable shear
failure, which is unsuitable for purposes of energy dissipation, cannot occur. This is the simplest example of the
application of capacity design. In a similar fashion columns
must be designed to be stronger than beams and this is
examined in a subsequent section.
With a clear definition of the extent of the plastic hinge
and the elastic regions of all structural members, the
appropriate detailing of the reinforcement can be established. As yielding can never occur in the elastic regions of
members because plastic hinges protect these regions against
--
--
/,
//
""
CL3
Displacement
Figure 3 Idealized (1), optimal (2) and degrading (3, 4) displacement responseof a member during an inelastic pulse
The efficient interaction of the two materials in reinforced concrete composite structural members depends on
o'oZ'2
(a)
//Concrete arch
(b)
V~////////Z////////Jx~
g
~Y/C////A
83
Shear w a l l s
The usefulness of structural walls in tire lateral load resistance of tall buildings has long been recognized. Because
buildings with significant shear walls are much stiffer than
those relying on frames, the first criterion o f seismic design
outlined in the introduction, i.e. protection against all
kinds o f damage, is eminently fulfilled. Suspicion still
prevails, however, with respect to the ability of shear walls
7
I
Plastic
beau
hinges
7
7
/
Moments from
static analysts
2.70s
3.09s
3.70s
7. 8 0 s
8 00s
Figure5 Acomparison of bending moment patterns encountered during instants of large earthquake motions with those derived from
code-specified lateral static loading
-'--"
[~\\,.y/ //
gradient/~/~
iii/
,F-J
~ --
Criticol
moment
///
Mcode
kl~r,t'~ir~l
r'~inirra~ , m
M
m
r'e
L 3 '.,.A ,,.~ ~
I I IkJI
I IK~I
IL.
k.AL
I ',,.A K~ k.A I
,~t.I
~-I
/~t,I
to respond in a ductile manner to the same extent as reinforced concrete ductile frames are expected to. For this
reason many building codes require shear walls to be
designed for significantly larger earthquake forces.
The previous review of seismic aspects emphasized that
proper understanding of structural behaviour, quantified
good detailing of critical regions and the suppression of
undesirable failure modes will ensure that ductile structures
can be constructed. This applies equally to shear walls.
Recent studies have greatly added to our understanding of
the inelastic response of shear wall structures.
Acknowledgements
The contribution of the colleagues of the author at the
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand, and
within the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake
Engineering to the development of a seismic design philosophy briefly outlined here, is gratefully acknowledged.
References
I
361 pp.
2 Park, R. and Paulay, T. 'Reinforced concrete smlctures', John
Wiley, New York, 1975
3 Binney, J. and Paulay, T. 'Foundations for shear wall structures'.
Bull. :~k,w Zealand Nat. Soc. Earthquake Eng. 1980, 13 (2), 171
4 Standards Association of New Zealand, 'Code of practice for the
design of concrete structures', Draft New Zealand Standard
NZS3101, Parts 1 and 2, 1982
5 Paulay, T. and Bull, I. N. 'Shear effects on plastic hinges of
earthquake resisting reinforced concrete frames', Comitd EuroInternational du B~ton, Bulletin d'Information No. 132, April
1979, pp. 165-172
6 Scolt, B. D., Park, R. and Priestlcy, M..1. N. 'Stress-strain
behaviour of concrete confined by overlapping hoops at low
and high strain rates',.l. ,4incr. Concrete Inst., lb'oe. 1982,
79 (1), 13
7 Paulay, T., Park, R. and Priestley, M. J. N. 'Reinforced concrete beam-columnjoints under seismic actions'. ,I..truer. Concrete Inst., Prec. 1978, 75 tl 1), 585
8 Paulay, T. 'Lapped splices in earthquake-resisting columns',
J. Amer. Concrete b~st.. Prec. (in press)