Sie sind auf Seite 1von 4

Indian Geotechnical Conference – 2010, GEOtrendz

December 16–18, 2010


IGS Mumbai Chapter & IIT Bombay

Seismic Behaviour of RCC Shear Wall Under Different Soil Conditions

Anand, N. Mightraj, C.1 Prince Arulraj, G.2


Assistant Professor Lecturer Professor and Dean
e-mail: anand_1612@rediffmail.com e-mail: mightraj@yahoo.com e-mail: princearulraj@yahoo.com

Karunya University, Coimbatore


1
PSN College of Engineering, Tirunelveli
2
SNS College of Technology, Coimbatore

ABSTRACT
Shear wall is a wall composed of braced panels with hard concrete surrounding it to counter the effects of lateral
loads acting on a structure. Although structures are supported on soil, most of the designers do not consider the
soil structure interaction and its subsequent effect on structures during an earthquake. When a structure is subjected
to an earthquake excitation, it interacts with the foundation and the soil, and thus changes the motion of the
ground. This means that the movement of the whole ground-structure system is influenced by the type of soil as
well as by the type of structure. Understanding of soil structure interaction will enable the designer to design
structures that will behave better during an earthquake. An attempt has been made during the present study to
understand the behavior of RCC shear wall subjected to seismic forces in building frames for different soil conditions
given in the response spectrum of the code IS 1893(Part I):2002. One to fifteen storey building space frames with
and without shear wall were analysed and designed using the software ETABS and the results from the study are
presented in this paper.

1. INTRODUCTION characteristics of earthquake motions observed at the


Shear wall is a concrete wall made to resist lateral forces foundation level depends on the relative mass and stiffness
acting on tall buildings. Shear walls are vertical elements properties of the soil and the structure. Thus the physical
of the horizontal force resisting system. When shear walls property of the foundation medium is an important factor
are designed and constructed properly, they will have the in the earthquake response of structures supported on it.
strength and stiffness to resist the horizontal forces. Properly There are two aspects of building foundation interaction
designed and detailed buildings with shear walls have during earthquakes, which are of primary importance to
exhibited very good performance during the past earthquake engineering. First, the response to earthquake
earthquakes. Just like reinforced concrete (RC) beams and motion of a structure founded on a deformable soil can be
columns, RC shear walls also perform much better if significantly different from that would occur if the structure
designed to be ductile. Overall geometric proportions of is supported on a rigid foundation. Second, the motion
the wall, types and amount of reinforcement, and connection recorded at the base of a structure or in the immediate
with the other elements in the building help in improving vicinity can be different from that which would have been
the ductility of walls. recorded had there been no building. Observations of the
response of the buildings during earthquakes have shown
2. SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION that the response of typical structures can be markedly
As waves from an earthquake reach a structure, they influenced by the soil properties if the soils are sufficiently
produce motions in the structure itself. These motions soft. Furthermore, for relatively rigid structures such as
depend on the structure’s vibrational characteristics and nuclear reactor containment structures, interaction effects
the building or structural layout. For the structure to react can be important even for relatively firm soils because the
to the motion, it needs to overcome its own inertia, which important parameter apparently is not the stiffness of the
results in an interaction between the structure and the soil. soil, but the relative stiffness of the building and its
The extent to which the structural response may alter the foundation. In terms of the dynamic properties of building
120 N. Anand, C. Mightraj and G. Prince Arulraj

foundation system, past studies have shown that the The details of the single storeyed frame considered for
interaction will, in general, reduce the fundamental analysis is shown in Fig 1.
frequency of the system from that of the structure on a rigid
DL+LL+SLx
base, dissipate part of vibrational energy of the building by
wave radiation into the foundation medium and modify 5m
the base motion of the structure in comparison to the free-
B2
field motion. Although all these effects may be present in
some degree for every structure, the important point is to
establish under what conditions the effects are of practical
C4
significance.
3m
3. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Anand. N et al, (2009) based on their work concluded that
the Shear walls increase the stiffness of the frames and 6m
this result in reduction of size of beams and columns. It is
suggested to provide shear wall for building frames which Fig. 1: Sample Frame with Dimensions
are located in high seismic zone. The above figure shows the beam, column
Ashraf. M et al (2008) studied the effect of location on identification along with load combination used for analysis
shear wall on axial and shear forces along with bending Sample Input Data
and twisting moments of beams and columns. It was All the frames considered during this study were first
reported that placing shear wall away from centre of gravity analyzed without considering the stiffness of the infill wall.
resulted in increase in most of the members forces. For The data for these frames are given below.
minimizing the forces in the members, the shear wall should Seismic Zone – V, Response reduction factor – 3,
be placed such that center of gravity and centroid of the Importance factor – 1.5, No of storeys – 1 to 15, Floor
building coincide with each other. Height – 3m, Thickness of Shear wall– 150mm, Imposed
Hidalgo.P.A et al (2002) proposed and implemented a Load – 4kN/m2,Materials – M20, Fe 415, Depth of Slab
model to include the shear failure mode for walls in – 150mm, Unit Weight of RCC – 25kN/m3,Type of soil –
available computer programs. The model developed by them Hard, Medium and Soft, Response Spectra – IS 1893 Part
is a macro-model validated with the experimental results I: 2002
of cyclic tests of shear walls. Though this model may still The shear wall has been provided satisfying the
be refined, it may be used to predict the inelastic seismic requirements of IS 13920:1993.
behavior of reinforced concrete, building structures as long
as they have nominally symmetric structural plans, thus 5. COMPARISON OF RESULTS
providing a useful tool to estimate seismic demands on this Base Shear
type of buildings. Building Frames without Shear Wall (Full Opening)
4. METHODOLOGY One to fifteen storey building frames were analyzed
Seismic analysis and design has been carried out for RCC without considering the effect of infill. Table shows the
Multi-storeyed building frames with and without Shear wall result for base shear values for different soil conditions.
using ETABS Software. One to fifteen storeyed 3D Space Table 1: Values of Base Shear for Soft, Medium,
building frames were analyzed and designed to understand Hard Soil - (Zone V)
the behavior of building frames subjected to seismic forces % Reduction in Base
with and without shear wall. The results of single storeyed Base Shear (Kn) Shear

building were compared with manual calculation and Soft to


No of Soft Medium Medium Medium to
STAAD Pro results. The following Codes were used for Storey Soil Soil Hard Soil Soil Hard Soil
the present study. 1 78.55 78.55 78.55 0 0
2 159.05 159.05 159.05 0 0
IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 – Criteria for Earthquake 3 242.74 242.74 242.74 0 0
Resistant Design of Structures. 4 324.3 324.3 268.02 0 17.35
5 405.87 386 283.82 4.90 26.47
General Provisions and buildings 6 487.43 404.83 297.67 16.95 26.47
IS 13920:1993 - Ductile Detailing of Reinforced 7 513.42 420.56 309.23 18.09 26.47
8 534.52 435.3 320.07 18.56 26.47
Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces. 9 550.73 448.5 329.78 18.56 26.47
10 565.59 460.6 338.68 18.56 26.47
Seismic Behavior of RCC Shear Wall Under Different Soil Conditions 121

From Table 1, it is seen that the base shear values Table 4: Values of Axial Force for Soft, Medium, Hard
decrease as the soil type changes from soft to medium and Soil - (Zone V)
medium to hard. The percentage reduction in base shear
values ranges between 0 to 26%. % Reduction in Axial
Axial Force (Kn) Force
Building Frames with Shear Wall Soft to
No of Medium Hard Medium Medium to
One to fifteen storey building frames were analysed Storey Soft Soil Soil Soil Soil Hard Soil
considering the effect of shear wall. Table 5.2 shows the 1 22.27 22.27 22.27 0 0
result for base shear values for different soil conditions.
2 58.29 58.29 58.29 0 0
Table 2: Values of Base Shear for Soft, Medium, Hard 3 107.85 107.85 107.85 0 0
4 171.09 171.07 154.23 0.01 9.84
Base Shear (Kn) % Reduction In Base Shear 5 247.98 240.37 201.22 3.07 16.29
6 338.56 299.99 249.96 11.39 16.68
Soft to
No of Medium Hard Medium Medium to 7 413.87 361.08 299.77 12.76 16.98
Storey Soft Soil Soil Soil Soil Hard Soil
1 94.81 94.81 94.81 0 0 8 487.16 424.2 351.08 12.92 17.24
2 206.71 206.71 206.71 0 0 9 562.13 488.69 403.4 13.06 17.45
3 318.68 318.68 318.68 0 0 10 638.75 554.52 456.7 13.19 17.64
4 430.62 430.62 355.88 0 17.36
5 542.55 516 379.41 4.89 26.47
6 654.49 543.58 399.69 16.95 26.47
It is seen from table 4 that the axial forces in member
7 695.62 566.59 416.54 18.55 26.48 decreases as the soil type changes from soft to hard. The
8 721.71 587.74 432.16 18.56 26.47 percentage reduction in the axial forces ranges from 0 to
9 744.95 606.67 446.08 18.56 26.47
10 766.17 623.95 458.79 18.56 26.47 18
It is seen from table 2 that the base shear values 7. BENDING MOMENT (COLUMN)
decreases as the soil type changes from soft to hard. The
reduction in the base shear values ranges between 0 to 26%. Building Frames without Shear Wall (Full Opening) Table
5 shows the values of bending moments in columns for
6. AXIAL FORCE different soil conditions for the building frames without
Building Frames without Shear Wall (Full Opening) shear wall.
Table 3 shows the values of Axial Force for different soil Table 5: Values of Bending Moment (column) for Soft,
conditions from one to fifteen storey building frames Medium, Hard Soil - (Zone V)
without shear wall.
% Reduction of
Table 3: Values of Axial Force for Soft, Medium, Hard Column
Soil - (Zone V) Moment (Kn-M) Moments
Soft to
% Reduction In Axial No of Medium Hard Medium Medium to
Axial Force (Kn) Force Storey Soft Soil Soil Soil Soil Hard Soil
Soft to 1 39.81 39.81 39.81 0 0
No Of Medium Medium Medium to
Storey Soft Soil Soil Hard Soil Soil Hard Soil 2 90.51 90.51 90.51 0 0
1 134.9 134.9 134.9 0 0 3 156.7 156.7 156.7 0 0
2 306.72 306.72 306.72 0 0 4 265.89 265.89 219.91 0 17.29
3 525.2 525.2 525.2 0 0 5 360.75 343.14 252.62 4.88 26.38
4 770.04 770.04 727.55 0 5.52 6 476.01 395.6 291.29 16.89 26.37
5 1075.5 1055.79 953.98 1.84 9.64 7 504.71 411.34 302.91 18.50 26.36
6 1463.1 1357.62 1220.76 7.21 10.08 8 508.4 414.31 305.04 18.51 26.37
7 1768.5 1622.26 1452.44 8.27 10.47
9 521.16 424.85 313.02 18.48 26.32
8 2148.7 1964.39 1750.1 8.58 10.91
10 535.66 436.66 315.32 18.48 27.79
9 2519.2 2298.32 2041.75 8.77 11.16
10 3009.6 2738.15 2422.89 9.02 11.51 It is seen from table 5 that the bending moment values
It is seen from table 3 that the axial forces in member decrease as the soil type changes from soft to hard. The
decreases as the soil type changes from soft to hard. The percentage reduction in the bending moment values ranges
percentage reduction in the axial forces ranges from 0 to 12. between 0 to 26.
Building Frames with Shear Wall Building Frames with Shear Wall
Table 4 shows the values of Axial Force for different soil Table 6 shows the values of bending moment in columns
conditions from one to fifteen storey building frames with for different soil conditions from building frames with shear
shear wall wall.
122 N. Anand, C. Mightraj and G. Prince Arulraj

Table 6: Values of Bending Moment (column) for Soft, Table 8: Values of Lateral Displacement for Soft, Medium,
Medium, Hard Soil - (Zone V) Hard Soil - (Zone V)
% Reduction in Bending % Reduction in Lateral
Moment (Kn-M) Moments Lateral Displacement (M) Displacement
Soft to
Soft to No of Medium Hard Medium Medium to
No of Medium Hard Medium Medium to Storey Soft Soil Soil Soil Soil Hard Soil
Storey Soft Soil Soil Soil Soil Hard Soil
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0.08 0.08 0.08 0 0
2 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0 0
2 0.22 0.22 0.22 0 0 3 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0 0
3 0.38 0.38 0.38 0 0 4 0.0014 0.0014 0.0012 0 14.29
4 0.56 0.56 0.47 0 16.07 5 0.0032 0.003 0.0022 6.25 26.67

5 0.76 0.73 0.55 3.95 24.66 6 0.0063 0.0052 0.0039 17.46 25.00
7 0.0103 0.0084 0.0061 18.45 27.38
6 0.98 0.83 0.64 15.31 22.89
8 0.0155 0.0126 0.0093 18.71 26.19
7 1.13 0.94 0.72 16.81 23.40
9 0.0224 0.0182 0.0134 18.75 26.37
8 1.26 1.05 0.8 16.67 23.81
10 0.0312 0.0254 0.0187 18.59 26.38
9 1.39 1.16 0.89 16.55 23.28
10 1.52 1.27 0.97 16.45 23.62 9. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
It is seen from table 6 that the bending moment values One to fifteen storeyed space frames with and without shear
decrease as the soil type changes from soft to hard. The wall were analyzed and designed as per the codal provisions
and the results are compared in various aspects. It is found
percentage reduction in the bending moment values ranges that up to three storeys, the base shear values were same for
between 0 to 22. all the three types of soils. Above three storeys, the base shear
8. LATERAL DISPLACEMENT values increases when the soil type changes from hard to
medium and medium to soft. The percentage of decrease in
Building Frames without Shear Wall (Full Opening) base shear for all the building frames varies from 0 to 26.5%
Table 7 shows the values of Lateral Displacements for when the type of soil changes for medium to hard and 0 to
building frames with different soil conditions and without 18.5% when the type of soil changes for soft to medium. The
shear wall. lateral displacement value increases when the type of soil
changes from hard to medium and medium to soft for all the
Table 7: Values of Lateral Displacement for Soft, Medium, building frames. The percentage of decrease in lateral
Hard Soil - (Zone V) displacement for all the building frames varies from 0 to
% Reduction in Lateral
26.5% when the type of soil changes for medium to hard and
Lateral Displacement (M) Displacement 0 to 18.7% when the type of soil changes for soft to medium.
Soft to Medium The Axial force and Moment in the column increases when
No of Medium Medium to Hard the type of soil changes from hard to medium and medium to
Storey Soft Soil Soil Hard Soil Soil Soil soft. Since the base shear, axial force, column moment and
1 0.0092 0.0092 0.0092 0 0 lateral displacements increase as the soil type changes, soil
structure interaction must be suitably considered while
2 0.0318 0.0318 0.0318 0 0
designing frames for seismic forces.
3 0.0657 0.0657 0.0657 0 0
REFERENCES
4 0.0995 0.0995 0.0822 0 17.39
IS : 1893 -1984, Indian Standard criteria for earthquake
5 0.1364 0.114 0.0838 16.42 26.49 resistant design of structures, Part 1 General provisions
6 0.1373 0.1297 0.0954 5.54 26.45 and buildings, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi,
1984.
7 0.1774 0.1445 0.1062 18.55 26.51
IS : 13920 - 1993, Indian Standard code of practice for ductile
8 0.1846 0.1504 0.1106 18.53 26.46 detailing of concrete structures subjected to seismic
9 0.1871 0.1523 0.112 18.60 26.46 forces, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 1993.
10 0.2345 0.2089 0.1522 10.92 27.14 Pankaj Agarwal and Manish Shrikhande “Earthquake
Resistant Design of Structures” PHI Learning Private
It is seen from table 7 that the lateral displacement Limited, New Delhi.
decreases as the soil type changes from soft to hard. The Anand N, Prince Arulraj G and Might raj C. (2009). “Study
percentage reduction in lateral displacement ranges from on Behavior of RCC Shear wall in Multistoried Building
0 to 26%. Frames Subjected to Seismic Forces” Proceeding of the
Building Frames with Shear Wall International Conference on ICAMB 2009, Dec 14-16,
2009, VIT University, Vellore pp 1806-1811.
Table 8 shows the values of Lateral Displacement for Ashraf. M. (2008). “Configuration of a multistorey building
building frames with shear wall for different soil conditions. subjected to lateral forces”, Asian Journal of Civil
It is seen from table 8 that the lateral displacement Engineering (Building and housing) Vol 9, No 5, 525-537.
decreases as the soil type changes from soft to hard. The Hidalgo.P.A. (2002). “An analytical model to predict the
percentage reduction in lateral displacement ranges from inelastic seismic behavior of shear wall, reinforced
0 to 26%. concrete structures”, Engineering Structures 24, 85 – 98.