A Performance-Based Design Approach for Coupled Core Wall Systems with Diagonally Reinforced Concrete Coupling Beams

Abstract

Coupled core wall systems (CCWs) are lateral force resisting systems that can provide remarkable lateral stiffness for mid- to high-rise buildings, exceeding the lateral stiffness of isolated walls while providing the redundancy and force redistribution capabilities of framed systems. The lateral stiffness provided by CCWs largely depends on the type of coupling beams used to transfer forces between wall piers. Diagonally-reinforced concrete coupling beams are one of the more common details although composite alternatives (e.g., those using structural steel W-shapes, hollow structural steel sections, or embedded steel plates) or beams with rhombic reinforcement are increasingly being selected as viable alternatives. Despite the favorable behavior exhibited by diagonally-reinforced coupling beams in experimental studies, designing and constructing diagonally-reinforced coupling beams having practical span-to-depth ratios presents significant difficulties, impacting the use of CCWs as a viable lateral force resisting system. This paper presents a performance-based design (PBD) approach that allows the designer to successfully proportion a code-compliant CCW system that addresses the shortcomings related to the traditional strength-based design approach. A prototype building is designed following both approaches, and is analyzed both statically and dynamically. Results show that the PBD approach produces a code-compliant structure that satisfies the most pressing constructability constraints.

Keywords

coupled walls reinforced concrete performance-based design seismic design design criteria

References

American Concrete Institute Committee 318 (2005). ACI 318–05 Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete and Commentary (ACI 318-05/ACI 318R-05), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI.

ACI-ASCE Joint Committee 352. (2002). Recommendations for Design of Beam-Column Connections in Monolithic Reinforced Concrete Structures (ACI 352R-02), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI.

Berg

V.B.

and Stratta

J.L.

(1964). “Anchorage and the Alaska Earthquake of March 27, 1964”, American Iron and Steel Institute, New York, pp.63.

Bertero

(1997). “Performance-based seismic engineering: A critical review of proposed guidelines”, Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes, A.A. Balkema Publisher, pp. 1–32

Brienen

(2002). “Spreadsheets (electronic version) of a 10-Story CCW Building Design”

Carr

(2000). Manual of Ruaumoko-Computer Program Library, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury.

Computers and Structures Inc (CSI) (1997). ETABS V6.2, Three Dimensional Analysis of Building Systems User Manual, Computers and Structures, Inc., Berkeley, California.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (2003). FEMA 403 World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000a). FEMA 368 NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC

10.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000b). FEMA 356 Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (FEMA 356), Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC.

11.

Fortney

(2005). Next Generation Coupling Beams, PhD Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Cincinnati.

12.

Hindi

and Sexsmith

(2001). “A proposed damage model for R/C bridge columns under cyclic loading”, Earthquake Spectra, EERI, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 261–281.

13.

Harries

K.A.

Mitchell

Redwood

R.G.

and Cook

W.D.

(1998). “Nonlinear seismic response predictions of walls coupled with steel and concrete beams”, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 25, pp. 803–818.

14.

Harries

K.A.

and McNeice

D.S.

(2006). “Performance-based design of high-rise coupled wall systems”, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Structures, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 289–306.

15.

Harries

K.A.

Fortney

Shahrooz

B.M.

and Brienen

(2005). “Design of practical diagonally reinforced concrete coupling beams – a critical review of ACI 318 requirements”, ACI Structures Journal, Vol. 102, No. 6, pp. 876–882.

16.

Harries

K.A.

Shahrooz

B.M.

Brienen

and Fortney

P.J.

(2004). “Performance-based design of coupled wall systems”, Composite Construction V, July 18–23, 2004, Kruger National Park, South Africa.

17.

Harries

K.A.

(2001). “Ductility and deformability of coupling beams in reinforced concrete coupled walls”, Earthquake Spectra, EERI, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 457–478.

18.

Imbsen Software Systems (2002). Release Notes of XTRACT v 2.6.2—Cross Sectional Xs Structural Analysis of Components, Imbsen Software Systems, Sacramento, CA.

19.

McNeice

(2004). Performance Based Design of a 30 Story Coupled Core Wall Structure, M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of South Carolina.

20.

National Research Council of Canada (1995). National Building Code of Canada, (NBCC), Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa.

21.

Park

and Paulay

(1975). Reinforced Concrete Structures, John Wiley & Sons Inc., pp. 645–655.

22.

Paulay

(2002). “A displacement-focused seismic design of mixed building systems”, Earthquake Spectra, EERI, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 689–718.

23.

Subedi

N.K.

(1990). “Ultimate strength analysis of reinforced concrete coupling beams”, The Structural Engineer, Vol. 68, No. 3, pp. 45–49.

24.

Subedi

N.K.

Marsono

A.K.

and Aguda

(1999). “Analysis of reinforced concrete coupled shear wall structures”, The Structural Design of Tall Buildings, Vol. 8, pp. 117–143.

25.

Xuan

(2005). Performance Based Design of a 15 Story Reinforced Concrete Coupled Wall Structures, M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Cincinnati.