Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Volume2,No 2,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingservices
Researcharticle
ISSN0976 4399
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS1, JayaKP2,AnniletSheejaL3
1AssistantProfssor(SeniorGrade)
2AssociateProfessor,
3FormerP.G.Student,
DivisionofStructuralEngineering,DepartmentofCivilEngineering,Collegeof
Engineering,Guindy,AnnaUniversity,Chennai 600025.
greeshmas@annauniv.edu
ABSTRACT
The frequent occurrence of the major earthquakes in the Indian subcontinent, and
construction of tall buildings, especially over the last two decades demands for the
construction of earthquake resistant buildings. Many of the tall buildings had collapsed in
recent earthquakes and the reasons attributed were poor design and construction practices.
Theobjectiveofthisworkistodiscussthepossibilitiesofmodelingreinforcementdetailing
ofreinforcedconcretemodelsinpracticaluse.Tocarryouttheanalyticalinvestigations,the
structure is modeled in a Finite Element software ANSYS. The specimens are modeled as
(i)discretemodeland(ii)smearedmodel.Itreportstheresultsoftheanalysisoftheflanged
shear wall with two differenttypes of modeling under cyclic loading. The consequences of
smallchangesinmodelingarediscussedanditisshownthatsatisfactoryresultsareobtained
fromthetwomodels.
Keywords: ShearWall,Modeling,Cyclicloading,Smeared,Discrete.
1.Introduction
Earthquakes demonstrate vulnerability of various inadequate structures, every time they
occur. The lessons taught from the aftermath of earthquakes and the research works being
carried out in laboratories give better understanding about the performance of the structure
andtheircomponents.Damageinreinforcedconcretestructureswasmainlyattributedtothe
inadequatedetailingofreinforcement,lackoftransversesteelandconfinementofconcretein
structuralelements.Typicalfailureswerebrittleinnature,demonstratinginadequatecapacity
todissipateandabsorbinelasticenergy.Thisnecessitatesabetterunderstandingofthedesign
anddetailingofthereinforcedconcretestructuresundervarioustypesofloading.
Anextensivedescriptionofpreviousstudiesontheunderlyingtheoryandtheapplicationof
the finite element method to the linear and nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete
structures is presented in excellent stateoftheart reports by the American Society of Civil
Engineers in 1982 [ASCE 1982]. The results from the FEA are significantly relied on the
stressstrain relationship of the materials, failure criteria chosen, simulation of the crack of
concreteandtheinteractionofthereinforcementandconcrete.Becauseofthesecomplexity
in short and longterm behavior of the constituent materials, the ANSYS finite element
program introduces a threedimensional element Solid65 which is capable of cracking and
crushing and is then combined along with models of the interaction between the two
constituentstodescribethebehaviorofthecompositereinforcedconcretematerial.Although
theSolid65candescribethereinforcingbars,thisstudyusesanadditionalelement,Link8,to
454
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
=
=
=
=
3m
3m
3.5m
0.45mx0.3m
455
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
Beamsize
Densityofconcrete
Liveloadonroof
Liveloadonfloors
Floorfinish
Brickwallonperipheralbeams
Brickwalloninternalbeams
Densityofbrickwall
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.3mx0.45m
25kN/m3
1.5kN/m2
3kN/m2
1kN/m2
230mm
150mm
20kN/m3
Figure1:Analyticalmodel
3.2Computationofdesignforces
The shear forces, bending moments and axial forces atthe bottom of the shear wall for the
13 load combinations (IS 1893(Part 1): 2002) are obtained. Seismic analysis is performed
usingEquivalentlateralforcemethodandalsobydynamicanalysis.
3.3DesignofFlangedShearWall
Thedesignmoment,shearandaxialforceatthebaseoftheflangedshearwallforalengthof
2.5mobtainedfromtheanalysisare4532.97kNm,285.28kNand2038.74kNrespectively.
TheflangedshearwallisdesignedforthesecriticalforcesasperIS13920:1993AnnexureI.
Reinforcementdetailsofshearwallareshownin Table1andFigure2.
456
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
Table1:Reinforcementdetailsofflangedshearwall
Shearwall
(Web)
Verticalbars
16mmbars@200mmc/c.
Horizontalbars
10mmbars@200mmc/c.
Lateralties
8mmbars@300mmc/c.
Figure2:Reinforcementdetailsofshearwall
4.FiniteElementModeling
TheflangedshearwallisanalysedusingthefiniteelementsoftwareANSYS.Themodeling
has been carried out in two ways, (i) discrete modeling and (ii) smeared modeling. For
discretemodel,thesmearedreinforcementcapabilityoftheSolid65elementisturnedofffor
thecorrespondingrealconstant.Here,Solid65elementisusedtomodeltheconcretewhile
Link8elementisusedtorepresentthereinforcement.
ANSYSprovidesathreedimensionaleightnodedsolidisoparametricelement,SOLID65,to
modeltheconcrete.Thiselementhaseightnodeswiththreedegreesoffreedomateachnode
translations in the nodal x, y and z directions. This element is capable of plastic
deformation,crackinginthreeorthogonaldirectionsandcrushing.Link8,threedimensional
sparelementisauniaxialtensioncompressionelementwiththreedegreesoffreedomateach
node translations in the nodal x, y and z directions. Plasticity, creep, swelling, stress
stiffeningandlargedeflectioncapabilitiesareincluded.
4.1SectionalProperties(RealConstants)
For discrete model, since there is no rebar data, the real constants (volume ratio and
orientationangle)aresettozeroandtheparameterstobeconsideredforLink8elementare
crosssectionalareaandinitialstrain.Thesectionalpropertiesadoptedfordiscretemodelare
showninTable2.
Table2:Realconstantsforsteelreinforcement(Link8element)
RealConstantSet
2
3
ElementType
Link8
(Verticalreinforcement)
Link8
Particulars
CrosssectionalArea(m2)
InitialStrain
CrosssectionalArea(m2)
Quantity
201x106
0
113x106
457
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
(Horizontalreinforcement)
Link8
(Shearreinforcement)
InitialStrain
CrosssectionalArea(m2)
InitialStrain
0
50x106
0
For smeared model, parameters to be considered are material number, volume ratio, and
orientation angles ( and ) in X and Y directions respectively. The rebars mentioned in
Table3,rebar1,2and3refertovertical, horizontalandshearreinforcements.Volumeratio
referstotheratioofsteeltoconcreteintheelement.
Table3: Realconstantsforconcrete(Solid65element)
Real
Constant
Set
Element
Type
Particulars
MaterialNumber
VolumeRatio
Solid65
OrientationAngleTHETA1
OrientationAnglePHI1
Constants
Real
Real
Real
Constantfor constantfor Constant
Rebar1
Rebar2 forRebar3
2
0.009
90
0
2
0.00785
0
90
2
0.00349
0
90
4.2MaterialProperties
The materialpropertiesdefined inthe modelare given inTable4.Forthereinforcing bars,
the yield stress was obtained from the experimental test as fy = 432 MPa and the tangent
modulus as 847 MPa. The concrete cube compressive strength fck determined from the
experimentalresultis44.22MPa,80%ofwhichisusedasthecylinderstrength.
ThemultilinearisotropicmaterialusestheVonMisesfailurecriterionalongwiththeWillam
andWarnke(1974)modeltodefinethefailureoftheconcrete.Ecisthemodulusofelasticity
of the concrete, and is the Poissons ratio. The characteristic strength of the concrete
consideredwas25N/mm2andthePoissonsratiowas0.3.
Ec =5000 fck =2.5x1010 N/m2
The multilinear isotropic stressstrain curve for the concrete under compressive uniaxial
loadingwasobtainedusing(1a)and(1b)(Macgregor1992).
ECe
f =
2
1 + (e e 0)
e0 =
2fck
EC
(1a)
(1b)
where,
f=stressatanystrain,=strainatstressf,0 =strainattheultimatecompressivestrength.
458
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
Table4:Materialproperties(AnthonyJ.Wolanski,B.S,2004)
Materia
Element
lModel
Type
No
MaterialProperties
MultiLinearIsotropic
ReferencePoint
Point1
Point2
Strain
0.00036
0.00060
Stress
9.802e6N/m2
15.396e6N/m2
Point3
Point4
Point5
0.00130
0.00190
0.00243
27.517e6N/m2
32.103e6N/m2
33.096e6N/m2
Concrete
Solid65
Sheartransfercoefficientsforanopencrack
0.2
Sheartransfercoefficientsforaclosedcrack
0.9
Uniaxialtensilecrackingstress
Uniaxialcrushingstress.
Link8
3.78e6N/m2
40e6N/m2
Biaxialcrushingstress
Biaxialcrushingstress
AmbientHydrostaticstressstate.
Biaxialcrushingstressunderambient
0
hydrostaticstressstate.
Uniaxialcrushingstressunderambient
0
hydrostaticstressstate.
Stiffnessmultiplierforcrackedtensile
0
condition.
Steel
LinearIsotropic
Ex
2.1x1011 N/m2
PRXY
0.3
BilinearIsotropic
YieldStress
TangModulus
415x106 N/m2
20x106 N/m2
5FiniteElementAnalysis
459
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
InANSYS,thefiniteelementmodelscanbecreatedeitherusingcommandpromptlineinput
or the Graphical User Interface (GUI). For the present study, the shear wall was modeled
usingGraphicalUserInterface. Forcarryingoutthe seismicanalysis,thecommandprompt
line input data was adopted. For carrying out the analysis, the command prompt line input
data is adopted. The convergence criteria used for the analysis are displacement with the
toleranceof0.001.
The analysis has been carried out for the shear wall subjected to reversible cyclic
loading.Theaxialloadof0.5Tisappliedontopnodesoftheshearwall.Lateralcyclicload
isappliedatthetopnodesinplanewiththeshearwall.Thedisplacementcycleadoptedfor
theanalysisisshowninFigure3.
Figure3:Displacementcycle
6.NumericalResultsandDiscussions
The modeling and analysis of flanged shear wall has been carried out with two different
conditions, such as (i) shear wall with smeared reinforcement (ii) shear wall with discrete
reinforcement subjected to in plane reversible cyclic loading. The observations from the
analyticalstudiesarebrieflydescribed.
6.1UltimateloadandMomentcarryingcapacity
The ultimate load and moment carrying capacity for the twotypes of models are shown in
Table5.Itcanbeobservedthattheultimate loadand momentarecomparatively higher for
the models with smeared reinforcement, howeverthe variation is within agreeable limits of
lessthan10%.
Table5: Ultimateloadcarryingcapacityofmodels
UltimateLoad(kN)
Description
Positive
Negative
Average
460
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
Shearwallwithsmearedreinforcement
Shearwallwithdiscretereinforcement
direction
direction
(Pu)
233.347
235.875
234.611
214.080
214.432
214.256
6.2DisplacementAnalysis
TheloadVsdisplacementhystereticloopsforthemodelsareshowninFigure4andFigure5.
For the smeared model, spindleshaped hysteretic loops were observed with large energy
dissipation capacity when compared to the discrete model. Here the ductility is increased
withoutcompromisingthestiffness.Thedisplacementenvelopecurveforboththemodelsis
shownin Figure6.
Figure4:LoadVsdisplacementcurvefordiscretemodel
Figure5:LoadVsdisplacementcurveforsmearedmodel
461
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
Figure6:Load displacementenvelopecurveformodels
6.3EnergyDissipationCapacity
Theareaenclosedbyahystereticloopatagivencyclerepresentstheenergydissipatedbythe
specimen during that cycle (ElAmoury and Ghobarah 2002). Figure 7 shows the energy
dissipated for each cycle of both the types of specimens. Smeared model exhibited higher
energydissipationthanthatofdiscretemodel.Butthevariationiswithin12.5%.
Figure7:Comparisonofcumulativeenergydissipated
6.4DisplacementDuctility
Ductility is the capacity of the structureor a member to undergo deformation beyond yield
withoutloosingmuchoftheloadcarryingcapacity.Thedisplacementductilityforthemodel
462
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
iscalculatedasperASCEguidelinesandispresentedinTable6.Itcanbeobservedthatthe
displacement ductility is enhanced for smeared model than that of discrete model. But the
variationiswithin2.5%.
Table6: Displacementductilityofmodels
Descriptionofthe YieldDisplacement
specimen
(mm)
Ultimate
Displacement(mm)
Displacementductility
DiscreteModel
4.6
40
8.69
SmearedModel
4.5
40
8.88
7.ValidationofResults
TheequationsforsheargiveninACI318code(2002)wereusedtoidentifytheshearfailure
of the RC shear wall. In ACI 318 code, for members subjected to additional axial
compressionforce,theshearcapacityofconcreteis
fc1
N
u
MPa
Vc =1+
14Ag 6
tu
t ACI
Analytical
Designationofspecimen
DiscreteModel
SmearedModel
UltimateLoad
Pu kN
Analytical
Theoretical
(Equation5.1)
214.432
1.04
1.0
235.875
1.08
1.0
7.Conclusions
Inseismiczones,astructurecanbesubjectedtostronggroundmotions,and,foreconomical
design,astructureisconsideredtoundergodeformationsintheinelasticrangetherefore,in
addition to strength requirement, the structure should undergo these inelastic deformations
463
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
464
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011
AnalysisofFlangedShearWallUsingAnsysConcreteModel
GreeshmaS,JayaKP,AnniletSheejaL
10. MacGregor, J.G (1992), Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design, Prentice
Hall Inc.
11. QiZhang(2004),Finiteelementapplicationofslabcolumnconnectionwithglass
fibre reinforced polymers, Research report, Memorial University of
Newfoundland,St.Johns,Canada,pp152.
12. STAADPRO(2007), UsersManualRevision.
13. William, K.J. and Warnke, E.P (1975), Constitutive Model for the Triaxial
Behavior of Concrete, Proceedings, International Association for Bridge and
StructuralEngineering,Vol.19,ISMES,Bergamo,Italy,pp174.
14. Wolanski, A.J (2004), Flexural behavior of reinforced and prestressed concrete
beams using finite element analysis, A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the
GraduateSchool,MarquetteUniversity,Milwaukee,Wisconsin,pp167.
465
InternationalJournalofCivilandStructuralEngineering
Volume2Issue 2 2011