Advertisement

Ductility Demand of a High-Rise RC Flat-Plate Core-Wall Building Structure in a Moderate-Seismicity Region: South Korea

  • Kyung Ran Hwang
  • Han Seon LeeEmail author
Conference paper

Abstract

An analytical model, calibrated with the results of shake-table tests on a 1:15 scale 25-storey RC flat-plate core-wall building model, is used to predict the demand of ductility at the critical elements. Under the maximum considered earthquakes in Korea, the maximum chord rotation of coupling beams and slabs reaches 0.01 rad with the maximum roof drift being 0.5%. The maximum curvature of the wall at the base is only 16% of the ultimate curvature, 0.041 rad/m, corresponding to the minimum plastic rotation 0.0064 rad, implemented by ACI 318 for the special-wall boundary. These results indicate that the seismic requirements for ductility in ACI 318 can be greatly alleviated for high-rise buildings in a moderate-seismicity region such as South Korea.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research presented herein was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016R1C1B1016653 and NRF-2017R1D1A1B03033488) and the Korea University Grant. The authors are grateful for such support. The authors are grateful for this support.

References

  1. American Concrete Institute (ACI). (2005). Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, ACI 318-05.Google Scholar
  2. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2014). Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. ASCE/SEI 41-13, Reston, VA.Google Scholar
  3. Architectural Institute of Korea (AIK). (2009). Korean Building Code. KBC 2009. Seoul, Korea. (in Korean).Google Scholar
  4. CSI. (2011). Components and elements for PERFORM-3D and PERFORM-Collapse Ver. 5. Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  5. Hwang K. R. (2016). Seismic Performance of high-rise reinforced concrete wall building structures. Ph.D. Thesis. Korea University Library.Google Scholar
  6. International Code Council. (2006). International building code. Country Club Hills, IL.Google Scholar
  7. LATBSDC. (2017). An alternative procedure for seismic analysis and design of tall buildings located in the los angeles region. Los Angeles Tall Buildings Structural Design Council, CA.Google Scholar
  8. Lee, H. S., Hwang, K. R., & Kim, Y. H. (2015). Seismic performance of a 1: 15-scale 25-story RC flat-plate core-wall building model. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 44(6), 929–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Melek, M., Darama, H., Gogus, A., & Kang, T. (2012). Effects of modeling of RC flat slabs on nonlinear response of high-rise building systems. In 15th world conference in earthquake engineering.Google Scholar
  10. Moehle, J., Bozorgnia, Y., Jayaram, N., Jones, P., Rahnama, M., Shome, N., Tuna, Z., Wallace, J., Yang, T., & Zareian, F. (2011). Case Studies of the Seismic Performance of Tall Buildings Designed by Alternative Means, Task 12 Report for the Tall Buildings Initiative, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center Report 2011/05, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  11. Moehle, J. P., & Diebold, J. W. (1984). Experimental study of the seismic response of a two-story flat-plate structure. Report No. UCB/EERC-84/08, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California-Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  12. Munir, A., & Warnitchai, P. (2012). The cause of unproportionately large higher mode contributions in the inelastic seismic responses of high-rise core-wall buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 41(15), 2195–2214.Google Scholar
  13. Naish, D., Fry, A., Klemencic, R., & Wallace, J. (2009). Experimental evaluation and analytical modeling of ACI 318-05/08 reinforced concrete coupling beams subjected to reversed cyclic loading. UCLASGEL Report 2009/06, 109 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. (2017). Guidelines for performance-based seismic design of tall buildings, Report PEER-2017/06, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  15. PEER/ATC. (2010). Modeling and acceptance criteria for seismic design and analysis of tall buildings. PEER/ATC 72-1 Report. Applied Technology Council. Redwood City, C.A.Google Scholar
  16. Satake, N., Suda, K. I., Arakawa, T., Sasaki, A., & Tamura, Y. (2003). Damping evaluation using full-scale data of buildings in Japan. Journal of Structural Engineering, 129(4), 470–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Zekioglu, A., Willford, M., Jin, L., & Melek, M. (2007). Case study using the Los Angeles tall buildings structural design council guidelines: 40-storey concrete core wall building. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 16(5), 583–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations