Three-dimensional model for nonlinear analysis of slender flanged reinforced concrete walls

Kolozvari, Kristijan; Kalbasi, Kamiar; Orakçal, Kutay; Wallace, John W.

doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112105

Cited by 27 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Simplified analysis models, tailored to the simulation of walls, have also been formulated and employed. The multiple vertical line element model (MVLEM) 24,25 has been used in simulations of coupled slender rectangular and flanged walls 26 . The method does not capture strength degradation of slender walls associated with shear failures, as it essentially enforces a plane‐section kinematic constraint to the solution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The multiple vertical line element model (MVLEM) 24,25 has been used in simulations of coupled slender rectangular and flanged walls. 26 The method does not capture strength degradation of slender walls associated with shear failures, as it essentially enforces a plane-section kinematic constraint to the solution. Additionally, the method is not capable of capturing the impact of bar buckling and rupture.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, the method is not capable of capturing the impact of bar buckling and rupture. Furthermore, the method, for nonplanar walls, 24,26 uses a linearly elastic law to describe the out-of-plane flexural behavior of walls.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Seismic analysis of a modern 14‐story reinforced concrete core wall building system using the BTM‐shell methodology

Mavros

Panagiotou²,

Koutromanos

et al. 2022

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper uses computational simulation to investigate the lateral load‐displacement behavior and failure modes of a modern 14‐story reinforced concrete (RC) core wall building. The design complies with the minimum code requirements of the current California Building Code, which is based on ASCE 7–16 and ACI 318–14. The computational representation of the building, which accounts for the material nonlinearities of all structural components, employs the beam‐truss model (BTM) for the walls and floor slabs. Analyses of the building model are conducted for static monotonic and cyclic lateral loads using the program FE‐MultiPhys, which provides a user‐friendly implementation of the BTM as an assemblage of rectangular shell macroelements. Two different load patterns, that is, lateral load distributions along the building height, are considered. The analyses provide insights into the evolution of damage and lateral strength degradation and their dependence on the load pattern, while also elucidating the complex interaction between the webs and flanges of the core wall and the system effects associated with coupling between the walls, beams, slabs, and columns. The presentation of the analytical results is accompanied by a discussion on the advantages of the BTM over seismic analysis methods used in current code‐minimum and performance‐based seismic design (PBSD) practice.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Seismic analysis of a modern 14‐story reinforced concrete core wall building system using the BTM‐shell methodology

Mavros

Panagiotou²,

Koutromanos

et al. 2022

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The concrete wall is discretized by a set of finite elements. The use of this type of model provides local responses which faithfully reflect the observations and results of experimental tests [8][9][10][11]. However, for highly redundant systems, the computation time becomes prohibitive (convergence problems).…”

Section: Microscopic Modelsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Slenderness Ratio and Influencing Parameters on the NL Behaviour of RC Shear Wall

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shear walls are very efficient structural elements to resist lateral seismic disturbance. Despite the aforementioned seismic performance, recent investigations report that they have suffered from significant structural damage after recent seismic activity, even for those complying with seismic provisions. These deficiencies in resistance and deformation capacities need to be explored. This study considers the influence of plastic length Lp, concrete compressive strength f_c28, longitudinal reinforcement ratio ρl, transverse reinforcement ratio ρsh, reduced axial load ν, confinement zone depth CS and focusing on the geometric slenderness λ. The parametric study has been conducted through NL pushover analysis using Peform3D software. The chosen coupled shear-flexure fiber macro model was calibrated with well-known cyclic experimental specimens. The paper points out the discrepancy between the two well-known codes EC8 and ASCE/SEI 41-13. In fact, the value of the slenderness ratio (λ) that trigger the beginning of a purely flexural behaviour recommended by EC8 (λ>2) is very different from the value of the ASCE/SEI 41-13 (λ>3) without accounting for the effect of the reduced axial force. Finally, it was found that RCW capacities are very sensitive to f_c28, ν, ρl, Lp and less sensitive to ρsh and CS. However, (λ) is the most decisive factor affecting the NL wall response. A new limit of slenderness and appropriate deformations of rotations are recommended to provide an immediate help to designers and an assistance to those involved with drafting codes. Doi: 10.28991/cej-2021-03091777 Full Text: PDF

show abstract

“…modeled with a three-dimensional multiple-vertical-line-element model (MVLEM-3D; Kolozvari et al, 2021) with nonlinear in-plane behavior and elastic out-of-plane behavior. Zero-length rotational springs were not added at each member-end to account for bar slip.…”

Section: Modeling Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benchmarking evaluation methodologies for existing reinforced concrete buildings

Sattar¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2016, the Applied Technology Council (ATC), with funding from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) under Contract SB1341-13-CQ-0009 Task Order 16-476, commenced the ATC-134 project to benchmark evaluation procedures in ASCE/SEI 41 with respect to data recorded for six reinforced concrete structures subjected to actual earthquakes or tested on a shake table . A secondary objective of the effort was to compare the evaluation results predicted by ASCE 41 with other evaluation standards. In 2019, ATC was awarded NIST Contract No. 1333ND19PNB730832 to extend the project to include evaluation of two additional buildings under the ATC-134-1 project. The need for benchmarking ASCE 41 methodologies was identified as a top priority by a workshop conducted in 2008 (NIST, 2009). This report presents summary findings from studies of eight reinforced concrete structures and recommendations for improvements to the next edition of ASCE 41, as well as opportunities for future work.

show abstract

Three-dimensional model for nonlinear analysis of slender flanged reinforced concrete walls

Cited by 27 publications

References 16 publications

Seismic analysis of a modern 14‐story reinforced concrete core wall building system using the BTM‐shell methodology

Seismic analysis of a modern 14‐story reinforced concrete core wall building system using the BTM‐shell methodology

Slenderness Ratio and Influencing Parameters on the NL Behaviour of RC Shear Wall

Benchmarking evaluation methodologies for existing reinforced concrete buildings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About