Seismic Performance of a Hybrid Coupled Wall System Using different Coupling Beam Arrangements

Öz

This study implemented multirecord nonlinear dynamic and fragility analysis in order to gain more insight into the hybrid coupled wall (HCW) system. Two potentials are used to construct coupling beams, which are the typical steel coupling beam and the replaceable steel coupling beam. Furthermore, an innovative idea for replaceable beams is discussed utilizing reinforced concrete infill instead of steel stiffeners. A new simplified FE model for such beam is carried out in order to explore how this new beam influences the seismic performance of HCW system. An additional equivalent bare RC wall case study is also taken into account for a comprehensive comparison. A precise 2D modelling method using Opensees platform is adopted after validation against experimental and complex 3D numerical simulations. The results indicate a good effect of the replaceable coupling beams concept upon reducing the vulnerability of wall piers under low and moderate events. In terms of coupling beams fragility, the replaceable steel coupling beams also demonstrate better damage resistance when compared with typical steel beams under low and moderate seismic events. Using reinforced concrete infill instead of steel stiffeners can significantly protect beams maintenance without affecting wall piers’ vulnerability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hybrid coupled wall (HCW)
• replaceable steel coupling beam (RSCB)
• replaceable composite coupling beam
• nonlinear dynamic analysis
• fragility assessment

Kaynakça

1. Harries, K.A., Gong, B., Shahrooz, B.M., Behavior and design of reinforced concrete, steel, and steel-concrete coupling beams, Earthquake Spectra, 16, 4, 775-800, 2000.
2. El-Tawil, S., Harries, K.A., Fortney, P.J., Shahrooz, B.M., Kurama, Y., Seismic design of hybrid coupled wall systems: state of the art, Journal of structural engineering, 136, 7, 755-69, 2010.
3. Hajjar, J.F., Composite steel and concrete structural systems for seismic engineering, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 58, 5-8, 703-23, 2002.
4. Harries, K.A., Mitchell, D., Cook, W.D., Redwood, R.G., Seismic response of steel beams coupling concrete walls, Journal of Structural Engineering, 119, 12, 3611-29, 1993.
5. Park, W.-S., Yun, H.-D., Seismic behaviour of coupling beams in a hybrid coupled shear walls, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 61, 11, 1492-524, 2005.
6. Shahrooz, B.M., Remmetter, M.E., Qin, F., Seismic design and performance of composite coupled walls, Journal of Structural Engineering, 119, 11, 3291-309, 1993.
7. El-Tawil, S., Kuenzli, C.M., Pushover of hybrid coupled walls. II: Analysis and behavior, Journal of Structural Engineering, 128, 10, 1282-9, 2002.
8. El-Tawil, S., Kuenzli, C.M., Hassan, M., Pushover of hybrid coupled walls. I: Design and modeling, Journal of Structural Engineering, 128, 10, 1272-81, 2002.

9. Fortney, P.J., Shahrooz, B.M., Rassati, G.A., Seismic performance evaluation of coupled core walls with concrete and steel coupling beams, Steel and Composite Structures, 7, 4, 279-301, 2007.
10. Gong, B., Shahrooz, B.M., Steel-concrete composite coupling beams—behavior and design, Engineering Structures, 23, 11, 1480-90, 2001.
11. Gong, B., Shahrooz, B.M., Concrete-steel composite coupling beams. I: Component testing, Journal of Structural Engineering, 127, 6, 625-31, 2001.
12. Gong, B., Shahrooz, B.M., Concrete-steel composite coupling beams. II: Subassembly testing and design verification, Journal of Structural Engineering, 127, 6, 632-8, 2001.
13. Gong, B., Shahrooz, B.M., Gillum, A.J., Cyclic response of composite coupling beams, Special Publication, 174, 89-112, 1998.
14. Harries, K.A., McNeice, D.S., Performance‐based design of high‐rise coupled wall systems, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 15, 3, 289-306, 2006.
15. Harries, K.A., Mitchell, D., Redwood, R.G., Cook, W.D., Nonlinear seismic response predictions of walls coupled with steel and concrete beams, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 25, 5, 803-18, 1998.
16. Shahrooz, B.M., Deason, J.T., Tunc, G., Outrigger beam–wall connections. I: component testing and development of design model, Journal of Structural Engineering, 130, 2, 253-61, 2004.
17. Shahrooz, B.M., Gong, B., Tunc, G., Deason, J.T., An overview of reinforced concrete core wall–steel frame hybrid structures, Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials, 3, 2, 149-58, 2001.
18. Shahrooz, B.M., Tunc, G., Deason, J.T., Outrigger beam–wall connections. II: subassembly testing and further modeling enhancements, Journal of Structural Engineering, 130, 2, 262-70, 2004.
19. Doran, B., Polat, Z., A proposal for estimation of coupling beam stiffness of shear walls, IMO,Teknik Dergi, 10, 3, 1973-82, 1999.
20. Fortney, P.J., Shahrooz, B.M., Rassati, G.A., Large-scale testing of a replaceable “fuse” steel coupling beam, Journal of structural engineering, 133, 12, 1801-7, 2007.
21. Christopoulos, C., Montgomery, M., Viscoelastic coupling dampers (VCDs) for enhanced wind and seismic performance of high‐rise buildings, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 42, 15, 2217-33, 2013.
22. Ji, X., Wang, Y., Ma, Q., Okazaki, T., Cyclic behavior of replaceable steel coupling beams, Journal of Structural Engineering, 143, 2, 04016169, 2017.
23. Ji, X., Liu, D., Sun, Y., Molina Hutt, C., Seismic performance assessment of a hybrid coupled wall system with replaceable steel coupling beams versus traditional RC coupling beams, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 46, 4, 517-35, 2017.
24. Standardization, E.C.f., Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance-part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, Brussels: European Committee for Standardization, 2005.
25. Ji, X., Wang, Y., Ma, Q., Okazaki, T., Cyclic behavior of very short steel shear links, Journal of Structural Engineering, 142, 2, 04015114, 2016.
26. Kanz, R., Schneider, B., Bouwkamp, J., Results and correlative analysis of a composite two storey eccentric braced frame, Earthquake Engineer 10th World, 3441, 1992.
27. Shayanfar, M., Barkhordari, M., Rezaeian, A., Experimental study of cyclic behavior of composite vertical shear link in eccentrically braced frames, Steel & Composite Structures, 12, 1, 13-29, 2012.
28. Bosco, M., Marino, E.M., Rossi, P.P., Modelling of steel link beams of short, intermediate or long length, Engineering structures, 84, 406-18, 2015.
29. Zona, A., Dall'Asta, A., Elastoplastic model for steel buckling-restrained braces, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 68, 1, 118-25, 2012.
30. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M.H., Fenves, G.L., OpenSees command language manual, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center, 264, 2006.
31. ABAQUS, A.u.s.M.V., ABAQUS, Inc., Dassault Systèmes,USA, 2018.,
32. Sun, G., Chuang-Sheng, W.Y., Gu, Q., DesRoches, R., An effective simplified model of composite compression struts for partially-restrained steel frame with reinforced concrete infill walls, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 17, 2, 403-15, 2018.
33. ASCE Task Committee on Design Criteria for Composite Structures in Steel and Concrete, Guidelines for design of joints between steel beams and reinforced concrete columns, Journal of Structural Engineering, 120, 8, 2330-57, 1994.
34. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J., Park, R., Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete, Journal of structural engineering, 114, 8, 1804-26, 1988.
35. Denavit, M.D., Hajjar, J.F., Leon, R.T. Seismic behavior of steel reinforced concrete beam-columns and frames. In: Structures Congress 2011, pp. 2852-61, 2011.
36. Paulay, T., Priestley, M.N., Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings, 1992.
37. Lu, X., Xie, L., Guan, H., Huang, Y., Lu, X., A shear wall element for nonlinear seismic analysis of super-tall buildings using OpenSees, Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 98, 14-25, 2015.
38. Ji, X., Sun, Y., Qian, J., Lu, X., Seismic behavior and modeling of steel reinforced concrete (SRC) walls, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 44, 6, 955-72, 2015.
39. Saatcioglu, M., Razvi, S.R., Strength and ductility of confined concrete, Journal of Structural engineering, 118, 6, 1590-607, 1992.
40. Kent, D.C., Park, R., Flexural members with confined concrete, Journal of the Structural Division, 1971.
41. OpenSees Wiki. Steel02 Material-Giuffré–Menegotto-PintoModel with Isotropic Strain Hardening.http://opensees.berkeley.edu/wiki/index.php/Steel02_Material_Giuffr%C3%A9-MenegottoPinto_Model_with_Isotropic_Strain_Hardening [Accessed on 2019].
42. PEER, N. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center NGA Database. 2011.
43. ATC. Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings Volume 1-Methodology (FEMA P-58-1). Applied Technology Council: Redwood City, CA, 2012.
44. Iervolino, I., Manfredi, G. A review of ground motion record selection strategies for dynamic structural analysis. In: Modern Testing Techniques for Structural Systems, Springer, 2008, pp. 131-63.
45. Birely, A.C., Lowes, L.N., Lehman, D.E., Fragility Functions for Slender Reinforced Concrete Walls (FEMA P-58/BD-3.8.9), Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2011.
46. Gulec, C.K., Gibbons, B., Chen, A., Damage States and Fragility Functions for W-Shape Steel Link Beams in Eccentrically Braced Frames (FEMA P-58/BD-3.8.5), Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2010.
47. Ji, X., Wang, Y., Zhang, J., Okazaki, T., Seismic behavior and fragility curves of replaceable steel coupling beams with slabs, Engineering Structures, 150, 622-35, 2017.