Seismic Design of

Reinforced Concrete Structures

CASE STUDY #1
Three Storey Office Building
Vancouver, B.C.
Canada

SOFTEK Services Ltd.

#275 – 13500 Maycrest Way
Richmond, BC, Canada V6V 2N8
Tel: (604) 273-7737
Web: www.s-frame.com

Copyright Notice
This document is copyright © 2007 by Softek Services Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may
be reproduced, transmitted, transcribed, stored in a retrieval system, or translated into any human or computer
language, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, optical, chemical, manual, or otherwise, without
the prior written permission of Softek Services Ltd.

Disclaimer
Softek Services Ltd. cannot be held responsible for the material presented in this document. This document is
intended for the use of professional personnel competent to evaluate the significance and limitations of its
content and recommendations, and who will accept the responsibility for its application. Softek Services Ltd.
disclaims any and all responsibility for the application of the contents presented in this document and for the
accuracy of any of the material contained in this document including computer software referenced herein.
CASE STUDY #1
In this project, we will design various shear walls in a three storey office building located in a
high risk seismic zone using SOFTEK’s products: S-FRAME® and S-CONCRETETM. Key
results generated by S-FRAME® and S-CONCRETETM will also be verified using hand
calculations.

Building Description

Design Data (NBCC 2005)

Location: Commercial Building in Vancouver, BC, Canada

(Granville & 41st Ave), Site Soil = Class C

Loads: Retail on Ground Floor, Live Load = 4.8 kPa

Offices on Upper Levels, Live Load = 2.4 kPa
Partition Allowance = 1.0 kPa
Front Curtain Wall Weight = 1.0 kPa
Ground Snow, Ss = 1.9 kPa and Sr = 0.3 kPa

Seismic: Sa(0.2) = 0.95, Sa(0.5) = 0.65, Sa(1.0) = 0.34, Sa(2.0) = 0.17, PGA = 0.47
Importance Factor IE = 1.0
Force Modification Factors Rd = 2.0, R0 = 1.4 (moderately ductile SFRS)

www.s-frame.com 2 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Materials: fc' = 25 MPa, fy = 400 MPa, Ec = 4500 fc' = 22,500 MPa
Wc = 2400 kg/m3 = 23.5 kN/m3
Ec 22,500
Gc = = = 9221 MPa
2(1 + ν ) 2(1 + 0.22)

Snow Load for Roof Level, NBCC 2005 Clause 4.1.6.2

S = Is ⎡⎣Ss ( Cb Cw Cs Ca ) + Sr ⎤⎦ = 1⋅ ⎡⎣1.9 ⋅ ( 0.8 ⋅ 1.0 ⋅ 1.0 ⋅ 1.0 ) + 0.3 ⎤⎦ = 1.82 kPa

Building Seismic Weight Estimation

Building Seismic Weight Estimation at Roof Level

Item Description Weight (kN)
1 Snow Load = 0.25 x 1.82 kN/m2 x 12m x 24m (no hole) 131
3
2 Slab = 23.5 kN/m x 0.2m x 12m x 24m (no hole) 1354
2
3 Front Curtain Wall = 1.0 kN/m x 1.5m x 12m 18
3
4 Columns = 23.5 kN/m x (3 x 0.3m x 0.3m + 0.2m x 0.4m) x 1.5m 12
3
5 Walls = 23.5 kN/m x [1.5mx(0.2mx64m + 0.25mx2.4mx3) – 506
2x0.2mx1.2mx0.75m]
Sub-Total W4 = 2,021

Building Seismic Weight Estimation at 3rd Floor

Item Description Weight (kN)
2
Area of Holes = 4.8m x 2.4m + 2.4m x 2.4m = 17.28 m
Net Area = 12m x 24m – 17.28 m2 = 270.7 m2
1 Partition Load = 0.5 kN/m2 x 270.7 m2 (max 0.5 kPa) 135
3 2
2 Slab = 23.5 kN/m x 0.2m x 270.7 m 1272
2
3 Front Curtain Wall = 1.0 kN/m x 3m x 12m 36
3
4 Columns = 23.5 kN/m x (3 x 0.3m x 0.3m + 0.2m x 0.4m) x 3m 25
3
5 Walls = 23.5 kN/m x [3mx(0.2mx64m + 0.25mx2.4mx3) - 2x0.2x1.2mx1.5m] 1012
Sub-Total W3 = 2,480

Building Seismic Weight Estimation at 2nd Floor

Item Description Weight (kN)
2
Area of Holes = 4.8m x 2.4m + 2.4m x 2.4m = 17.28 m
Net Area = 12m x 24m – 17.28 m2 = 270.7 m2
1 Partition Load = 0.5 kN/m2 x 270.7 m2 (max 0.5 kPa) 135
3 2
2 Slab = 23.5 kN/m x 0.2m x 270.7 m 1272
2
3 Front Curtain Wall = 1.0 kN/m x 3.25m x 12m 39
3
4 Columns = 23.5 kN/m x (3 x 0.3m x 0.3m + 0.2m x 0.4m) x 3.25m 27
3
5 Walls = 23.5 kN/m x [3.25mx(0.2mx64m + 0.25mx2.4mx3) – 2x0.2x1.2mx1.5m] 1098
Sub-Total W2 = 2,571

Total Weight = W = Wx = Wy = W2 + W3 + W4 = 2021 + 2480 + 2571 = 7072 kN

www.s-frame.com 3 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Building Period, NBCC 2005 Clause 4.1.8.11(3)
Ta = 0.05 ( hn ) 4 = 0.05 ( 9.5 )
3 0.75
= 0.27 sec same for each direction

According to Article 4.1.8.7(2), Equivalent Static Force Procedure as described in Article

4.1.8.11 may be used for structures that meet the following criteria: “regular structures that are
less than 60m in height and have a fundamental lateral period, Ta, less than 2sec in each of the
orthogonal directions”. For this building, it meets this criteria.

Seismic Base Shear Calculation

S a ( 0. 2 )
For = 5.6 < 8 and Ta < 1.0, M v = 1 .0 Table 4.1.8.11
S a ( 2. 0 )
S a ( 0. 2 )
For = 5.6 < 8 and Ta < 0.5, J = 1 .0 Table 4.1.8.11
S a ( 2. 0 )
∴ No reduction in overturning moment

For Site C Class and S a (0.2) = 0.95, Fa = 1.0 Table 4.1.8.4.B

For Site C Class and S a (1.0) = 0.34, Fv = 1.0 Table 4.1.8.4.C

Minimum Lateral Earthquake Force

S(Ta )M v IE W
V= Article 4.1.8.11
R dR 0
S(2.0)M v IE W 2
S(0.2)IE W
V≥ For R d ≥ 1.5, V≤ 3

R dR 0 R dR 0

S(T = 0.2s) = FaSa(0.2) = 1.0x0.95 = 0.95

S(T = 0.5s) = FvSa(0.5) or FaSa(0.2), whichever is smaller = 0.65
S(T = 2.0s) = FvSa(2.0) = 0.17

Using linear interpolation: S(T = 0.27s) = 0.88

0.88 x1.0 x1.0 x7072 kN 0.17 x1.0 x1.0 x7072

V= = 2223 kN ≥ = 429 kN
2.0 x1.4 2.0 x1.4
2
x0.95 x1.0 x7072 kN
V≤ 3 = 1600 kN
2.0 x1.4

∴Seismic Base Shear = V = 1600 kN

www.s-frame.com 4 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Centre of Mass Calculation

Since most of the weight is distributed uniformly around the building, we will place the axes at
the centre of the slab (see figure below). The only weights that will influence the location of the
centre of mass will be Walls #2, #4, #5, #6 and the holes in the slab for the 2nd and 3rd floor. We
will assume there are no holes at the roof level.

For the roof level:

∑ WiUi = 23.5kN / m 3 x1.5mx0.2mx3.7mx3.6m + 23.5kN / m 3 x1.5mx0.25mx 2.4mx 4.8x3 = 94 + 305 = 399kNm
U=
∑ WiUi = 399 = 0.2m
∑ Wi 2021

∑ WiVi = 23.5kN / m3 x1.5mx0.2mx3.7mx( −3.05)m

+23.5kN / m3 x1.5mx 0.25mx 2.4mx( −1.2 − 6 − 8.4m) = −80 − 330 = −410kNm

V=
∑ WiVi = − 410 = −0.2m
∑ Wi 2021

For practical purposes, the centre of mass equals to the centre of the slab ( U = V = 0 ). The
influence of Wall #2, #4, #5, #6 and the holes in the slab is minimal because the weight of the
slab and the other walls (#1, #3, and #7) dominate the centre of mass for this building.

www.s-frame.com 5 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Centre of Rigidity Calculation

This hand calculation is based on the assumption that walls are “strong” in bending in one
direction and “very weak” or “negligible” in bending in the other direction. Lateral stiffness (k)
of each wall element must also be estimated – assuming some form of flexural behaviour.
Special attention is given to Wall #2 and Wall #6. The two walls will likely be reinforced in
such a manner that they will deflect and behave as a single unit – an “L-Shaped” wall. This will
be reflected in the computations below. For the purpose of this calculation, the following
reference axes will be used.

Walls #1 and #3 (use h = 3m for calculations)

Ag = 24m x 0.2m = 4.8 m2
Ig = 0.2m x (24m)3 / 12 = 230.4 m4
If we apply a 100kN force at the top, the lateral deflection will be approximately:
Vh 3 1.2Vh 100,000 x3000 3 1.2x100,000 x3000
∆= + = 12
+ = 0.00017 + 0.0081 = 0.0083 mm
3E c Ig Gc A g 3 x22,500 x230.4 x10 9221x 4.8 x10 6
(assuming a pin-fixed end condition)
100 kN
ky = = 12,087 kN/mm and k x = 0 (no stiffness in weak direction)
0.0083 mm

Walls #4 and #5 (use h = 3m for calculations)

Ag = 2.4m x 0.25m = 0.6 m2
Ig = 0.25m x (2.4m)3 / 12 = 0.288 m4
If we apply a 100kN force at the top, the lateral deflection will be approximately:
Vh 3 1.2Vh 100,000 x3000 3 1.2x100,000 x3000
∆= + = + = 0.1389 + 0.0651 = 0.204 mm
3E c Ig G c A g 3 x 22,500 x0.288 x1012 9221x0.6 x10 6
(assuming a pin-fixed end condition)
100 kN
kx = = 490 kN/mm and k y = 0 (no stiffness in weak direction)
0.204 mm

www.s-frame.com 6 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Wall #2 and Wall #6 as an L-Shape (use h = 3m for calculations)

S-CONCRETE L-Shape Results If we apply a 100kN force at the top in the X-direction, the
lateral deflection will be approximately:
Igy = 678.6 x10 9 mm 4 , A g = 1290 x10 3 mm 2
Vh 3 1.2Vh 100,000 x3000 3 1.2x100,000 x3000
∆x = + = +
3E c Igy G c A g 3 x 22,500 x 678.6 x10 9 9221x1.29 x10 6
∆ x = 0.0589 + 0.0303 = 0.089 mm
100 kN
kx = = 1120 kN / mm
0.089 mm

If we apply a 100kN force at the top in the Y-direction, the

lateral deflection will be approximately:
Igx = 1785.9 x10 9 mm 4 , A g = 1290 x10 3 mm 2
Vh 3 1.2Vh 100,000 x3000 3 1.2x100,000 x3000
∆y = + = +
3E c Igy G c A g 3 x22,500 x1785.9x10 9 9221x1.29 x10 6
∆ y = 0.0224 + 0.0303 = 0.0527 mm
100 kN
ky = = 1898 kN / mm
0.0527 mm

Wall #7 (use h = 3m for calculations)

This was modelled in S-FRAME using quadrilateral elements and a rigid diaphragm on the roof
(see figure below). A force of 100kN was applied at the roof and a lateral deflection of
0.0213mm was obtained.
F 100 kN
kx = = = 4700 kN/mm and k y = 0 (no stiffness in weak direction)
∆ 0.0213 mm

www.s-frame.com 7 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

 Element Xi Yi Kxi Kyi Xi Kyi Yi Kxi
(m) (m) (kN/m) (kN/m) (kN x 103) (kN x 103)
(x 103) (x 103)
1 0 --- --- 12,087 0 ---
2&6 10.2 9.8 1,120 1,898 19,360 10,976
3 12 --- --- 12,087 145,044 ---
4 N/A 3.6 490 --- --- 1,764
5 N/A 6.0 490 --- --- 2,940
7 N/A 24 4,700 --- --- 112,800
Totals 6,800 26,072 164,404 128,480

∑ Xi Kyi = 164,404 = 6.30 m

Distance to Centre of Rigidity = X cr =
∑ Kyi 26,072
∴Small difference between centre of mass and centre of rigidity (ex = 0.3m)

∑ Yi Kxi = 128,480 = 18.9 m

Distance to Centre of Rigidity = Ycr =
∑ Kxi 6,800
∴Significant difference between centre of mass and centre of rigidity (ey = 6.89m)

www.s-frame.com 8 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Distribution of Base Shear, NBCC Clause 4.1.8.11(6)

Ft = 0 because Ta < 0.7sec

Wx h x
Fx = ( V − Ft ) n
where V = 1600 kN
∑ Wi h i
1

Level Height Storey Weight Wx hx (kNm) Lateral Force Storey Shear

hx (m) Wx (kN) Fx (kN) Vx (kN)
Roof 9.5 2,021 19,199.5 693 693
3 6.5 2,480 16,120 582 1275
2 3.5 2,571 8,998.5 325 1600
∑ = 7,072 ∑ = 44,318 ∑ = 1600

Design Eccentricities, NBCC Clause 4.1.8.11(10)

Tx = Fx (ex ± 0.10 Dnx) = Fx (0.3 ± 0.1 x 12) = Fx (0.3 ± 1.2) kNm

Tx = Fx (ey ± 0.10 Dny) = Fx (6.9 ± 0.1 x 24) = Fx (6.9 ± 2.4) kNm

Hand Calculations Versus 3D Modelling in S-FRAME®

For this project and for one load case, hand calculations will be used to compute the distribution
of lateral forces and torsional moments to all the lateral force resisting elements in this building
for the upper most level only. A 3D model using S-FRAME® will also be created and the results
will be compared to hand computed values. The 3D model in S-FRAME® can also give us an
estimate of the torsional sensitivity, B, for this building, NBCC Clause 4.1.8.11(9). Numerous
other load cases and load combinations will also be generated using S-FRAME®.

3D Beam Model in S-FRAME®

In this 3D model, the walls are modelled as beam elements with a computed moment of inertia
for strong axis bending and zero for weak axis bending. This approach should produce similar
results as hand calculations because the same assumption is applied – weak or non-existent in
one direction and strong in the other direction. Shear areas are also provided to give more
accurate deflections for evaluation purposes. “Rigid” members are provided to model the
behavior at the ends of each wall. “Rigid” means a relatively high moment of inertia.

According to Clause 4.1.8.3 of NBCC 2005, structural modelling shall be representative of the
magnitude and spatial distribution of the mass of the building and of the stiffness of all elements
of the SFRS. The model shall account for the effect of cracked sections in reinforced concrete
and sway effects arising from the interaction of gravity loads with the displaced configuration of
the structure (P-Delta). S-FRAME® can perform geometric non-linear analysis (P-Delta).

Furthermore, according to Clause 21.2.5.2.1 of CSA-A23.3-04, for the purpose of determining

forces in and deflections of the structure, reduced section properties shall be used. The effective
property to be used as a fraction of the gross section property shall be as specified below:

www.s-frame.com 9 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Coupling Beams Ave = 0.15 Ag; Ie = 0.4 Ig without diagonal reinforcement

Ps
Column Ie = αc Ig ; α c = 0.5 + 0.6 '
≤ 1 .0
fc A g
Ps
Wall Axe = αw Ag; Ie = αw Ig ; α w = 0.6 + '
≤ 1.0
fc A g

For walls, Ps shall be determined at the base of the wall. Preliminary calculations indicate an αw
value in the range of 0.62 and αc value in the range of 0.65 which will be confirmed later.

Element Gross Properties Effective Section Properties

3
200 x24,000
Ig = = 2.304 x1014 mm 4
12 Ie = 0.62 x 2.304 x 1014 = 1.428 x 1014 mm4
Wall #1 & #3 A g = 200 x24,000 = 4,800,000 mm 2 Ae = 0.62 x 4,800,000 = 2,976,000 mm2
5 Aev = 0.62 x 4,000,000 = 2,480,000 mm2
Av = x 200 x 24,000 = 4,000,000 mm 2
6
Igy = 678.6 x10 9 mm 4
Iey = 0.62 x 678.6 x 109 = 4.21 x 1011 mm4
Igx = 1785.9 x10 9 mm 4
Iex = 0.62 x 1785.9 x 109 = 11.07 x 1011 mm4
Walls #2 & #6 A g = 1290 x10 3 mm 2 Ae = 0.62 x 1290 x 103 = 799,800 mm2
5 Aev = 0.62 x 1075 x 103 = 666,500 mm2
Av = x1290 x10 3 = 1075 x10 3 mm 2
6
250 x 2400 3
Ig = = 2.88 x1011 mm 4
12 Ie = 0.62 x 2.88 x 1011 = 1.786 x 1011 mm4
Walls #4 & #5 A g = 250 x2400 = 600,000 mm 2 Ae = 0.62 x 600,000 = 372,000 mm2
5 Aev = 0.62 x 500,000 = 310,000 mm2
Av = x 250 x 2400 = 500,000 mm 2
6
300 4
Igx = Igy = = 6.75 x10 8 mm 4
Column 12 Ie = 0.65 x 6.75 x 108 = 4.387 x 108 mm4
300x300 A g = 300 x300 = 90,000 mm 2 Ae = Ag = 90,000 mm2

200 x 400 3
Igx = = 1.066 x10 9 mm 4
12
Iex = 0.65 x 1.066 x 109 = 6.929 x 108 mm4
Column 400 x 200 3
Igy = = 2.67 x10 8 mm 4 Iey = 0.65 x 2.67 x 108 = 1.735 x 108 mm4
200x400 12
Ae = Ag = 80,000 mm2
A g = 200 x 400 = 80,000 mm 2

www.s-frame.com 10 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Wall #7 is modelled as a “frame” with “rigid members” that connect the end faces of each “pier”
to the ends of “coupling beams”. The “coupling beams” represent the segments at the openings.
This is illustrated below in elevation.

Element Gross Properties Effective Section Properties

200 x 2400 3
Ig = = 2.304 x1011 mm 4
12 Ie = 0.62 x 2.304 x 1011 = 1.428 x 1011 mm4
Wall #7a A g = 200 x2400 = 480,000 mm 2 Ae = 0.62 x 480,000 = 297,600 mm2
5 Aev = 0.62 x 400,000 = 248,000 mm2
Av = x200 x2400 = 400,000 mm 2
6
200 x 4800 3
Ig = = 1.8432 x1012 mm 4
12 Ie = 0.62 x 1.8432 x 1012 = 1.1428x 1012 mm4
Wall #7b A g = 200 x 4800 = 960,000 mm 2 Ae = 0.62 x 960,000 = 595,200 mm2
5 Aev = 0.62 x 800,000 = 496,000 mm2
Av = x200 x 4800 = 800,000 mm 2
6
200 x700 3
Ig = = 5.717 x10 9 mm 4 Ie = 0.4 x 5.717 x 109 = 2.287x 109 mm4
Coupling Beam B1 12
Ae = 0.15 x 140,000 = 21,000 mm2
A g = 200 x700 = 140,000 mm 2

200 x1500 3
Ig = = 5.625 x1010 mm 4 Ie = 0.4 x 5.625 x 1010 = 2.25x 1010 mm4
Coupling Beam B2 12
Ae = 0.15 x 300,000 = 45,000 mm2
A g = 200 x1500 = 300,000 mm 2

200 x 2000 3
Ig = = 13.333 x1010 mm 4 Ie = 0.4 x 13.333 x 1010 = 5.333x 1010 mm4
Coupling Beam B3 12
Ae = 0.15 x 400,000 = 60,000 mm2
A g = 200 x2000 = 400,000 mm 2

www.s-frame.com 11 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

S-FRAME Model using Beam Type Members Only and Rigid Diaphragms

The S-FRAME 3D model of the office building shown here consists only of “beam” type
members with rigid diaphragms specified for each floor level. Only the 2nd floor diaphragm is
displayed above.

Special attention is given to Walls #2 and #6. Walls #2 and #6 is modelled as one column which
will be subjected to biaxial bending. The properties of this “column” is given the section
properties of the L-Shape (i.e. Ix and Iy). Note that to minimize the amount of torsion that will be
attracted to each wall, the torsional constants, J, for each wall were assigned negligible values.

www.s-frame.com 12 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

S-FRAME Model – Center of Rigidity Evaluation

To assess the accuracy of “C of R” calculation, we will apply 1000 kN force at each level in the
X-direction at the computed “C of R”. In theory, loading the building at the “C of R” will
generate deflections without rotation – “pure translation”. The results are displayed below (X-
deflections in mm).

As you can see above, the building is rotating in a clockwise direction. This most likely means
that we have underestimated the stiffness of the L-Shape (Walls #2 & #6). Using a trial-and-
error approach in S-FRAME, we discovered the “true” center of rigidity near ey = 5.5m for this
building (as indicated below).

www.s-frame.com 13 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Torsional Sensitivity Evaluation

The next step is to use this 3D model in S-FRAME to give us an estimate of the torsional
sensitivity, B, for this building. Here, the primary concern would be loading in the X-direction
creating a twist in the building. According to NBCC Clause 4.1.8.11(9), the equivalent static
forces, Fx, shall be applied at distances of ±0.10Dny = ±2.4m from the center of mass at each
floor level. The critical load case for this evaluation would be applying the forces at a distance
of +2.4m away from the “C of M”. This is implemented in S-FRAME by applying the
equivalent static forces, Fx, at the center of mass at each level plus a torsional moment of Fx x
2.4m in the appropriate direction.

δ max
Torsional Sensitivity: Bx =
δ avg

Corner Deflections Total # of δ max δ avg

Level Bx
(mm) Corners (mm) (mm)
Roof 2x2.85 + 2x2.13 = 9.96 4 2.85 2.49 1.14
3rd 2x1.83 + 2x1.27 = 6.20 4 1.83 1.55 1.18
2nd 2x0.794+2x0.475 = 2.54 4 0.794 0.634 1.25

Base on the results above, B = 1.25 for this building. According to NBCC Clause 4.1.8.11(10),
for a building with B ≤ 1.7, torsional effects can be accounted for by applying equivalent static
forces, Fx, to the building located at ±0.10Dnx and ±0.10Dny from the “C of M” for each principle
direction.

Technically, we should also evaluate the torsional sensitivity for loading in the y-direction (N-S
direction). Since large walls (Wall #1 and #3) dominate the rigidity in the y-direction, it is
unlikely that the torsional sensitivity parameter, B, for loading in this direction will be greater
than that computed above.

www.s-frame.com 14 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Distribution of Lateral Force to Walls

For hand calculations in tabular form, we will consider only one load case (E-W direction) and
applied to the roof only. The results of these hand calculations will then be compared to the
results generated by S-FRAME for the walls in the top floor. To complete the design of this
building, other load cases will be generated in S-FRAME including loading in the N-S direction,
dead loads, and factored load combinations.

Vx = Fx = 693 kN, Vy = 0 kN
T = Vx (ey + 0.10Dny) = 693 x (6.9 + 0.10 x 24) = 6445 kNm

Note: T = Vx (ey - 0.10Dny) = 693 x (6.9 - 0.10 x 24) = 3119 kNm done in S-FRAME only

www.s-frame.com 15 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Distribution of E-W Lateral Force and Torsional Moment to Walls

Vx = Fx = 693 kN, Vy = 0 kN
T = -Vx (ey + 0.10Dny) = -693 x (6.9 + 0.10 x 24) = -6445 kNm

Force and Torsional Moment Applied at Roof Level

Kxi Kyi K xi y i k xi K yi − x i k yi
Xi Yi Vx T Vxi Vy T Vyi
Wall (kN/m) (kN/m) ∑ K xi Jr ∑ K yi Jr
(m) (m) (kN) (kN)
(x 103) (x 103) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
#1 -6.3 --- 0 12,087 0 0 0 0 -374 -374
#2/6 3.9 -9.1 1,120 1,898 114 50 164 0 36 36
#3 5.7 --- 0 12,087 0 0 0 0 338 338
#4 --- -15.3 490 0 50 37 87 0 0 0
#5 --- -12.9 490 0 50 31 81 0 0 0
#7 --- 5.1 4700 0 479 -118 361 0 0 0
∑ 6800 26,072 693 0 693 0 0 0

Jr = ∑ X i2 K yi + ∑ Yi2 K xi
[ ]
Jr = 6.3 2 ⋅ 12,087 + 3.9 2 ⋅ 1,898 + 9.12 ⋅ 1120 + 5.7 2 ⋅ 12,087 + (15.3 2 + 12.9 2 ) ⋅ 490 + 5.12 ⋅ 4700 x10 3 kNm
9
Jr = 1.313 x10 kNm

www.s-frame.com 16 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Comparison of Hand Calculations Versus S-FRAME 3D Results

Wall Hand Calculations S-FRAME Comments

#1 -374 kN -347 kN less stiff in S-FRAME
#2 & #6 36 kN / 164 kN* 28 kN / 233 kN* more stiff in S-FRAME
#3 338 kN 319 kN less stiff in S-FRAME
#4 87 kN 66 kN less stiff in S-FRAME
#5 81 kN 68 kN less stiff in S-FRAME
#7 361 kN 68 + 187 + 71 = 326 kN less stiff in S-FRAME

* Shear in the weak direction (Vy = 233 kN) for the L-Shape (Walls #2 & #6) is not displayed
in the above plot but can be obtained easily in a plot for “y Shear”.

Overall, hand calculated results give similar values to S-FRAME. Reasonable numbers were
obtained using simple assumptions on flexural behaviour which otherwise would be considered
rather complex in the 3D world.

The key to structural design is to develop a complete load path, determine the sectional forces
from this load path, and reinforce the members appropriately. This has been accomplished using
both hand calculations and in S-FRAME.

To complete the design of this building, other load cases and load combinations will be
generated using S-FRAME including earthquake loading E-W (-0.10Dny), earthquake loading N-
S (±0.10Dnx), and dead load.

www.s-frame.com 17 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Dead Load Estimation (at base of the wall)

Wall #1 Tributary Area ≈ 0.375 x 6m x 24m = 54.0 m2

Slab = 0.2m x 54.0 m2 x 23.5 kN/m3 = 253.8 kN at each level
Partitions = 54.0 m2 x 1 kN/m2 = 54.0 kN at each level (except roof)
Self Weight = 9.5m x 0.2m x 24m x 23.5 kN/m3 = 1,071.6 kN
Total at base = 3 x 253.8 + 2 x 54.0 + 1071.6 = 1,941 kN
Walls #2 & #6 Tributary Area ≈ 5m x 5m = 25 m2
Slab = 0.2m x 25 m2 x 23.5 kN/m3 = 117.5 kN at each level
Partitions = 25 m2 x 1 kN/m2 = 25 kN at each level (except roof)
Self Weight = 9.5m x 0.25m x 2.4m x 23.5 kN/m3 = 134 kN
Total at base = 3 x 117.5 + 2 x 25 + 134 = 537 kN
Wall #7b Tributary Area ≈ 0.8 x 3m x 4.8m = 11.5 m2
Slab = 0.2m x 11.5 m2 x 23.5 kN/m3 = 54.0 kN at each level
Partitions = 11.5 m2 x 1 kN/m2 = 11.5 kN at each level (except roof)
Self Weight = 9.5m x 0.2m x 4.8m x 23.5 kN/m3 = 214 kN
Total at base = 3 x 54.0 + 2 x 11.5 + 214 = 399 kN

Hand calculations for dead load at the base of each wall are similar to the results generated by S-
FRAME. Since S-FRAME is relatively more accurate than the hand computed values, we will
use S-FRAME results to evaluate the effective section properties as outlined in Clause 21.2.5.2.1
of CSA-A23.3-04.

www.s-frame.com 18 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Wall #1 – Effective Section Properties

Ps = 1919 kN, fc' = 25 MPa, Ag = 200 x 24,000 = 4,800,000 mm2

Ps 1,919,000
α w = 0.6 + '
= 0 .6 + ≈ 0.62
fc A g 25 x 4,800,000
Axe = 0.62 x Ag = 2,976,000 mm2 (effective cross-sectional area)
Ave = 0.62 x 5/6 x Ag = 2,480,000 mm2 (effective shear area)
Ie = 0.62 x Ig = 0.62 x 2.304x1014 = 1.428x1014 mm4

Walls #2 & #6 – Effective Section Properties

Ps = 490 kN, fc' = 25 MPa, Ag = 1,290,000 mm2

Ps 490,000
α w = 0 .6 + '
= 0.6 + ≈ 0.62
fc A g 25 x1,290,000
Axe = 0.62 x Ag = 799,800 mm2 (effective cross-sectional area)
Ave = 0.62 x 5/6 x Ag = 666,500 mm2 (effective shear area)
Iey = 0.62 x Igy = 0.62 x 678.6 x109 = 4.21x1011 mm4
Iex = 0.62 x Igx = 0.62 x 1785.9 x109 = 11.1x1011 mm4

Wall #7b – Effective Section Properties

Ps = 440 kN, fc' = 25 MPa, Ag = 200 x 4,800 = 960,000 mm2

Ps 440,000
α w = 0 .6 + '
= 0. 6 + ≈ 0.62
fc A g 25 x960,000
Axe = 0.62 x Ag = 595,200 mm2 (effective cross-sectional area)
Ave = 0.62 x 5/6 x Ag = 496,000 mm2 (effective shear area)
Ie = 0.62 x Ig = 0.62 x 1.84x1012 = 1.14x1012 mm4

For practical purposes, all the walls in this building appear to have an effective moment of inertia
of 0.62 x Ig and effective cross-sectional area of 0.62 x Ag. This was used in the S-FRAME
model to compute the factored lateral deflections (∆f) and the factored sectional forces (Nf, Vf,
and Mf) used for analysis and design of these walls.

www.s-frame.com 19 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Design Load Combinations

S-FRAME will be used to generate the load cases and load combinations for design purposes.
The following load combinations will be created for the design of Wall #1, #2 & #6, and #7b
which is based on 1.0 x Earthquake + 1.0 x Dead load factors.

Load Combination #1: 1.0 x E-W (+0.10Dny) + 1.0 x D

Load Combination #2: 1.0 x E-W (-0.10Dny) + 1.0 x D
Load Combination #3: 1.0 x N-S (+0.10Dnx) + 1.0 x D
Load Combination #4: 1.0 x N-S (-0.10Dnx) + 1.0 x D

Lateral Load in Opposite Direction (primarily used to design the L-Shape)

Load Combination #5: -1.0 x E-W (+0.10Dny) + 1.0 x D
Load Combination #6: -1.0 x E-W (-0.10Dny) + 1.0 x D
Load Combination #7: -1.0 x N-S (+0.10Dnx) + 1.0 x D
Load Combination #8: -1.0 x N-S (-0.10Dnx) + 1.0 x D

Companion loads associated with Live and Snow Loads may easily be added to the above load
combinations but, in this case, they will not likely govern the design of this building. The
primary purpose here is to illustrate the use and application of S-FRAME and S-CONCRETE in
the analysis and design of this office building.

Design Sectional Forces at base for Wall #7b (generated by S-FRAME)

Load Combination #1: Nf = -424 kN, Vf = 413 kN, Mf = 2118 kNm, ∆f = 1.5 mm
Load Combination #2: Nf = -437 kN, Vf = 472 kN, Mf = 2341 kNm, ∆f = 1.6 mm
Load Combination #5: Nf = -443 kN, Vf = 463 kN, Mf = 2478 kNm, ∆f = 1.8 mm
Load Combination #6: Nf = -425 kN, Vf = 522 kN, Mf = 2700 kNm, ∆f = 1.9 mm

Note: The shear forces displayed here must be “magnified” for design purposes. According
to Clause 21.7.3.4.1 of CSA-A23.3-04, the design shear force or resistance must not
be less than the smaller of: (1) the shear force corresponding to the development of
the nominal moment capacity of the wall at its plastic hinge location and (2) shear
force at RdRo = 1.0. S-CONCRETE can make this estimation.

Design Sectional Forces at base for Walls #2 & #6 (generated by S-FRAME)

LC #1: Nf = +477 kN, Vfy = 411 kN, Mfz = +1134 kNm, ∆fy = 2.2 mm
Vfz = 53 kN, Mfy = +84 kNm, ∆fz = 0.1 mm
LC #2: Nf = +482 kN, Vfy = 388 kN, Mfz = +1062 kNm, ∆fy = 2.0 mm
Vfz = 30 kN, Mfy = -65 kNm, ∆fz = 0.03 mm
LC #5: Nf = -1458 kN, Vfy = 373 kN, Mfz = -1209 kNm, ∆fy = 2.6 mm
Vfz = 64 kN, Mfy = +122 kNm, ∆fz = 0.1 mm
LC #6: Nf = -1395 kN, Vfy = 350 kN, Mfz = -1137 kNm, ∆fy = 2.5 mm
Vfz = 41 kN, Mfy = +85 kNm, ∆fz = 0.1 mm

Note: This wall may experience small tension forces according to S-FRAME results. This
is reasonable because Wall #3 will be carrying a significant amount of shear force due
to the torsional moment which, in term, will tend to “lift” Walls #6 and #2.

www.s-frame.com 20 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Design Sectional Forces at base for Wall #1 (generated by S-FRAME)

Load Combination #1: Nf = -1641 kN, Vf = 676 kN, Mf = 9380 kNm, ∆f = 0.19 mm
Load Combination #2: Nf = -1580 kN, Vf = 195 kN, Mf = 6448 kNm, ∆f = 0.08 mm
Load Combination #3: Nf = -1882 kN, Vf = 712 kN, Mf = 3963 kNm, ∆f = 0.16 mm
Load Combination #4: Nf = -1851 kN, Vf = 953 kN, Mf = 5429 kNm, ∆f = 0.22 mm
Load Combination #5: Nf = -2196 kN, Vf = 803 kN, Mf = 8855 kNm, ∆f = 0.23 mm
Load Combination #6: Nf = -2257 kN, Vf = 322 kN, Mf = 5923 kNm, ∆f = 0.11 mm
Load Combination #7: Nf = -1955 kN, Vf = 585 kN, Mf = 4488 kNm, ∆f = 0.13 mm
Load Combination #8: Nf = -1986 kN, Vf = 826 kN, Mf = 5953 kNm, ∆f = 0.19 mm

Note: Here, the largest moment is generated from a load combination with a significant
torsional moment (#1) which is interesting. The largest shear force is generated from
a load combination that applies the lateral loads in the “strong direction” for this wall
(#4) which is as expected.

S-FRAME results (i.e. axial force, shear force, and moment diagrams) can be directly exported
to S-CONCRETE to complete the design. This is illustrated below for Wall #7b, Wall #2 & #6,
and Wall #1. Hand calculations will also be performed to verify the results of S-CONCRETE.

www.s-frame.com 21 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Wall #7b – Design and Detailing

S-FRAME will export sectional forces and moments

evaluated at various stations along the member. In this
case, it has evaluated sectional forces at three stations
per member segment per load combination. For this
member in the 3D model, it has been subdivided into
two segments on the first floor.

www.s-frame.com 22 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Let’s assume that minimum distributed reinforcing and zone reinforcing will be sufficient to
meet all the requirements of CSA-A23.3-04. We will design the base of the wall (i.e. plastic
hinge region).

Wall Dimensions: Lw = 4800mm, bw = 200mm, hw = 9500mm

h w 9500
= = 1.98 ≤ 2.0 → Squat Wall (technically)
L w 4800
However, for practical design purposes, we will treat it as a normal wall.
To force S-CONCRETE to not apply the squat wall provisions, we
assigned a value of 9601mm to hw.

Panel Reinforcing: Vertical Bars - 10M @ 400 Each Face (2 curtains)

Horz Bars – 10M @ 400 Each Face (2 curtains)
2A b 2x100
ρ v = ρh = = = 0.0025 ≥ 0.0025 Clause 21.7.3.3.1
b w S 200 x 400

Zone Reinforcing: 4 – 15M bars at each end of the wall (minimum requirement)
10M Ties @ 95mm (Clause 21.7.3.3.2 and 21.6.6.9)
S ≤ 6db = 6 x16 = 96 mm → Governs
≤ 24d tie = 24 x11.3 = 271 mm
≤ 0.5b w = 0.5 x 200 = 100 mm

Axial Load and Moment Capacity:

M f 2700
Utilization = = = 0.74 ≤ 1.0 → OK
Mr 3643

S-CONCRETE results and interaction diagram shown below:

www.s-frame.com 23 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Overstrength Factor: Mn = 4198 kNm (nominal moment capacity from S-CONCRETE)
Mf = 2700 kNm (from S-FRAME)
Mn 4198
γw = = = 1.555 (same as S-CONCRETE’s estimate)
Mf 2700

Dimensional Limitations: Clause 21.7.3.1, Lu = 3500 – 200 = 3300 mm

Lu 3300
b w = 200 mm ≥ = = 235 mm → Not Good
14 14
Lu 3300
≥ = = 165 mm → OK
20 20

However, according to Clause 21.6.3.4, the Lu/14 requirement may be waived if the neutral axis
depth does not exceed 4bw or 0.3Lw (i.e. C ≤ 800 mm) which is the case here. S-CONCRETE
will compute the neutral axis depths for load combination where flexure is dominant and
determine if the wall meets these requirements for dimensions and ductility. This is displayed
below in the “Results Report” window of S-CONCRETE.

www.s-frame.com 24 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Ductility Evaluation: Clause 21.7.3.2, Rd = 2.0, R0 = 1.4

Check #1
C = 456 mm < 0.15Lw = 0.15x4800 = 720 mm → OK

Alternative Check #2
hw 9500
C < 0.33L w = 1584 mm and ∆ f = 1.9 mm < = = 27 mm → OK
350 350

Alternative Check #3 (Clause 21.6.7)

∆ f R dR 0 − ∆ f γ w 1.9 x2.0 x1.4 − 1.9 x1.55
θ id = = = 0.0003 ≥ 0.003 ∴ θ id = 0.003
L 4800
hw − w 9500 −
2 2
⎛ε L ⎞ 0.0035 x 4800
θ ic = ⎜⎜ cu w − 0.002 ⎟⎟ = − 0.002 = 0.0164 ≤ 0.025
⎝ 2C ⎠ 2x 456
θid < θic → OK

All ductility checks indicate that special concrete confinement

requirements will not be required. S-CONCRETE has the capability to
evaluate special concrete confinement requirements as outlined in Clause
21.6.7.4 for zone reinforcing.

Design Shear Force: According to Clause 21.7.3.4.1 of CSA-A23.3-04, the design shear force
or resistance must not be less than the smaller of: (1) the shear force
corresponding to the development of the nominal moment capacity of the
wall at its plastic hinge location and (2) shear force at RdRo = 1.0.

⎛M ⎞
Vf (design) ≈ ⎜⎜ n ⎟⎟ Vf ( S−FRAME) = γ w Vf ( S−FRAME) = 1.555 x 522 = 812 kN
⎝ Mf ⎠
Vf (design) ≤ R dR 0 Vf ( S−FRAME) = 2.0 x 1.4 x 522 = 1462 kN

S-CONCRETE has the option to perform “Shear Force Magnification” in

the manner described above to determine the design shear forces.

Shear Resistance: Shear Design is based on Clauses 21.6.9.2 to 21.6.9.7 (simplified method)
Panel Reinforcing – 10M @ 400 H.E.F.
Vf = 812 kN
Vr = Vc + Vs ≤ Vr max = 0.15λφ c fc;'b w d v for θ id ≤ 0.005
φs A v fy dv
Vc = λβφ c f c' b w d v and Vs =
S tan θ
o
θ = 45 Clause 21.7.3.4.2 (c), d v = 0.8L w = 3840 mm
bwS
If A v = 200mm 2 > 0.06 f c' = 60mm 2 , then β = 0.18 Clause 11.3.6.3(a)
f yv
β ≤ 0.18 for θ id ≤ 0.005 Clause 21.6.9.6(b )

Vc = λβφ c f c' b w d v = 1 x 0.18 x 0.65 x 25 x 200 x3840 N = 449.3 kN

www.s-frame.com 25 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

 φs A v fy dv 0.85 x 200 x 400 x3840
Vs = = N = 652.8 kN
S tan θ 400 x tan 45 o
Vr = Vc + Vs = 449.3 + 652.8 = 1102 kN
Vf 812
Utilization = = = 0.737 < 1.0 → OK
Vr 1102

S-FRAME Results

www.s-frame.com 26 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Walls #2 & #6 – Design and Detailing

Let’s assume that minimum distributed reinforcing and zone reinforcing will be sufficient to
meet all the requirements of CSA-A23.3-04. We will design the base of the wall (i.e. plastic
hinge region).

Wall Dimensions: Lw = 3700mm, bw = 250mm, hw = 9500mm

h w 9500
= = 3.96 > 2.0 → Not a Squat Wall
L w 3700

Panel 1 Reinforcing: Vertical Bars - 10M @ 300 Each Face (2 curtains)

Horz Bars – 10M @ 300 Each Face (2 curtains)
2A b 2x100
ρ v = ρh = = = 0.00267 ≥ 0.0025 Clause 21.7.3.3.1
b w S 250 x300

Panel 2 Reinforcing: Vertical Bars - 10M @ 400 Each Face (2 curtains)

Horz Bars – 10M @ 400 Each Face (2 curtains)
2A b 2x100
ρ v = ρh = = = 0.0025 ≥ 0.0025 Clause 21.7.3.3.1
b w S 200 x 400

www.s-frame.com 27 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Zone A Reinforcing: 4 – 10M bars at each end of the wall (minimum requirement)
10M Ties @ 65mm (Clause 21.7.3.3.2 and 21.6.6.9)
S ≤ 6db = 6 x11.3 = 68 mm → Governs
≤ 24d tie = 24 x11.3 = 271 mm
≤ 0.5b w = 0.5 x 200 = 100 mm

Zone B Reinforcing: 4 – 15M bars at each end of the wall (minimum requirement)
10M Ties @ 95mm (Clause 21.7.3.3.2 and 21.6.6.9)
S ≤ 6db = 6 x16 = 96 mm → Governs
≤ 24d tie = 24 x11.3 = 271 mm
≤ 0.5b w = 0.5 x 200 = 100 mm

Zone C Reinforcing: 4 – 10M bars at each end of the wall (minimum requirement)
10M Ties @ 65mm (Clause 21.7.3.3.2 and 21.6.6.9)
S ≤ 6db = 6 x11.3 = 68 mm → Governs
≤ 24d tie = 24 x11.3 = 271 mm
≤ 0.5b w = 0.5 x 200 = 100 mm

Note: Emphasis was placed on minimizing the amount of vertical bars in the section including
both zone steel and distributed reinforcing. This will reduce the axial load and moment
capacity which increases the N vs M utilization. This, in turn, will reduce the design or
magnified shear forces because it will generate a smaller overstrength factor.

Axial Load and Moment Interaction Diagram (Biaxial Bending, Theta = 94°):

www.s-frame.com 28 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

 M f 1137.1
Utilization = = = 1.025 ≈ 1.0 → Borderline
Mr 1109.4

Overstrength Factor for bending about z-z axis (Theta = 90°):

S-CONCRETE has determined the governing load combination for pure unixaxial bending
about the z-z axis is LC #1 which is 1.0xE-W (+0.10Dny) + 1.0xD.

Nf = +477 kN, Mf = 1134 kNm

Mn = 1365 kNm (nominal moment capacity from S-CONCRETE)
Mn 1365
γw = = = 1.20 (same as S-CONCRETE’s estimate)
M f 1134

Panel 1 Dimensions: Clause 21.7.3.1, Lu = 3500 – 200 = 3300 mm

L u 3300
b w = 250 mm ≥ = = 165 mm → OK
20 20
L = 2400mm ≤ 0.25h w + t 2 = 0.25 x9500 + 200 = 2575mm → OK

Panel 2 Dimensions: Clause 21.7.3.1, Lu = 3500 – 200 = 3300 mm

L u 3300
b w = 200 mm ≥ = = 165 mm → OK
20 20
L = 3700mm > 0.25h w + t 2 = 0.25 x9500 + 250 = 2625mm → NG

According to Clause 21.7.3.1, the flange width of Panel 2 is too long. This means that part of
Panel 2 is ineffective in the overall axial load and moment capacity of the section for bending
about the z-z axis. Technically, we should shorten the length of the panel which is unlikely.
Evaluating the nominal moment capacity in this direction using the full length will give a
conservative estimate on the required design shear force (i.e. higher overstrength factor). The
“Warning” can be ignored in this case.

www.s-frame.com 29 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Ductility Evaluation: Clause 21.7.3.2, Rd = 2.0, R0 = 1.4, C = 310 mm from S-CONCRETE

Check #1
C = 310 mm < 0.15Lw = 0.15x2400 = 380 mm → Not OK

Alternative Check #2
hw 9500
C < 0.33L w = 792 mm and ∆ f = 2.6 mm < = = 27 mm → OK
350 350

Alternative Check #3 (Clause 21.6.7)

∆ f R dR 0 − ∆ f γ w 2.6 x 2.0 x1.4 − 2.6 x1.20
θ id = = = 0.0005 ≥ 0.003 ∴ θ id = 0.003
L 2400
hw − w 9500 −
2 2
⎛ε L ⎞ 0.0035 x2400
θ ic = ⎜⎜ cu w − 0.002 ⎟⎟ = − 0.002 = 0.0115 ≤ 0.025
⎝ 2C ⎠ 2x310
θid < θic → OK

⎛ Mn ⎞
Design Shear Force: Vf (design) ≈ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ Vf (S−FRAME) = γ w Vf (S−FRAME) = 1.203 x 411 = 494 kN
⎝ Mf ⎠
Vf (design) ≤ R dR 0 Vf (S−FRAME) = 2.0 x 1.4 x 411 = 1151 kN

S-CONCRETE has the option to perform “Shear Force Magnification” in

the manner described above to determine the design shear forces.

Shear Resistance: S-CONCRETE results

For this wall, the section may be subjected to tension forces. Here, the
General Method of Shear Design must be used to evaluate the shear
resistance.

www.s-frame.com 30 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Wall #1 – Design and Detailing (Sq uat Wall)

Let’s assume that minimum distributed reinforcing and zone reinforcing will be sufficient to
meet all the requirements of CSA-A23.3-04. We will design the base of the wall.

Wall Dimensions: Lw = 24,000mm, bw = 200mm, hw = 9500mm

hw 9500
= = 0.396 < 2 .0 → Squat Wall (Clause 21.7.4)
Lw 24,000

Panel Reinforcing: Vertical Bars - 10M @ 300 Each Face (2 curtains)

Horz Bars – 10M @ 300 Each Face (2 curtains)
2A b 2x100
ρ v = ρh = = = 0.00333 ≥ 0.003 Clause 21.7.4.5(a)
b w S 200 x300
Maximum Bar Spacing = 300mm Clause 21.7.4.5(a)

Zone Reinforcing: According to Clause 21.7.4.6, tied vertical reinforcement shall be provided
at each end of the wall. The minimum reinforcement ratio of 0.005 shall
be provided over a minimum wall length of 300mm. A minimum of four
bars shall be provided and tied as a column in accordance with Clause 7.6.
The ties shall be detailed as hoops.

6 – 15M bars at each end of the wall (spaced at 150 mm apart)

2A b 2x 200
ρ= = = 0.0133 ≥ 0.005 Clause 21.7.4.5(a)
b w S 200 x150

10M Ties @ 200 mm (Clause 7.6.5.2)

S ≤ 16db = 16 x16 = 256 mm
≤ 48d tie = 48 x11.3 = 542 mm
≤ b w = 200 mm → Governs

www.s-frame.com 31 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Axial Load and Moment Capacity: (S-CONCRETE Results)

Mf 9379
Utilization = = = 0.11 < 1.0 → OK
Mr 83860

According to Clause 21.7.4.7, the vertical tension force required to resist overturning at the base
of the wall shall be provided by zone reinforcing and panel reinforcing in addition to the amount
required by Clause 21.7.4.8 to resist the shear corresponding to the applied bending moment.

Mf
Let ρ m = Estimated Vertical Steel Ratio Required for Moment ≈ ρ v ⋅ = 0.00333 x 0.112 = 0.00037
Mr

www.s-frame.com 32 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

 Mn 97757
Design Shear Force: γ w = = = 10.4 > R dR 0 = 2.0 x 1.4 = 2.8
Mf 9379
∴γw = 2.8 Overstrength Factor
Vf (design) = γw Vf (sframe) = 2.8 x 953 = 2,668 kN (Load Combination #4)

Shear Design: Clause 21.7.4.8

dv = 0.8 Lw = 0.8 x 24,000 = 19,200 mm
Vf ≤ 0.15 λ φc fc' bw dv = 0.15 x 1 x 0.65 x 25 x 200 x 19,200 N = 9360 kN
β = 0 → Vc = 0
φs A v fy dv φs fy dv Av
Vs = = ⋅ ρhb w where = ρhb w
S tan θ tan θ S
Vf ≤ Vr = Vc + Vs = Vs assume θ = 45°

φs fy dv 0.85 x 400 x19,200

Vr = Vs = ⋅ ρhb w = x0.00333 x200 N = 4352 kN
tan θ tan 45 o
2668
Utilization = = 0.61 < 1 → OK
4352

Let ρvs = vertical steel ratio required to resist shear

Ag = 200 x 24,000 = 4,800,000 mm2

For load combination #4, Vf = 2668 kN, Ps = Nf = 1851 kN

Vf tan θ 2,668,000 x tan 45 o
ρ h = 0.00333 ≥ ρ hs = ρ h (req' d) = = = 0.00204 → OK
φ s f y d v b w 0.85 x 400 x19,200 x 200
ρ hs Ps 0.00204 1,851,000
ρ vs = − = − = 0.00113
tan θ2 φ s f y A g tan 45
2 o 0.85 x 400 x 4,800,000

www.s-frame.com 33 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

 For another load combination, Vf = 2668 kN, Ps = Nf = 1448 kN
Vf tan θ 2,668,000 x tan 45 o
ρ h = 0.00333 ≥ ρ hs = ρ h (req' d) = = = 0.00204 → OK
φ s f y d v b w 0.85 x 400 x19,200 x 200
ρ hs Ps 0.00204 1,448,000
ρ vs = − = − = 0.00115
2
tan θ φ s f y A g tan 2 45 o 0.85 x 400 x 4,800,000

Total Vertical Steel Ratio Required:

ρ v = 0.00333 ≥ ρ v (required) = ρ m + ρ vs = 0.00037 + 0.00115 = 0.00152 → OK

According to Clause 21.7.4.7, all vertical reinforcement required at the base of
the wall shall be extended the full height of the wall.

S-FRAME Results (Panel and Zone Reinforcing):

www.s-frame.com 34 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.

Conclusions

When designing walls that intersect with other walls (Wall #6), we have neglected the influence
of Wall #3 on Wall #6. A portion of Wall #3 should be included in the calculation for moment
capacity which, in turn, will likely increase the design shear force. Overall, neglecting the
intersection of Wall #6 with Wall #3 will not change the reinforcing configuration very much – if
at all. However, as always, careful consideration of all the parameters should be given
nevertheless.

Some engineers may have considered a different approach to the design of Wall #7. In our
model, we have assumed a “coupled wall system” which may be inappropriate for such a short
wall. In fact, a finite element model of the same building appears to contradict the sectional
forces produced by this beam model version. For more information on the finite element model,
refer to “Case Study #2”. The finite element model suggests that “beam theory of plane sections
remaining plane” does not apply to Wall #7 and Wall #1. In Case Study #2, you will find
significant differences in the sectional forces generated for each wall. This suggests that Wall #7
should be designed as a “squat wall” and view the window openings as having little influence on
the overall behaviour of the wall.

Hand calculations may give you reasonable design values for the lateral load resisting elements
in a given building but 3D modelling will give you a better representation of the overall
performance of the building provided the model “truly” represents its behaviour in an
earthquake. The key to any design is to ensure that a “load path” has been defined and carried
through to all the lateral load and gravity load resisting elements in the building. Minimizing the
twist in the building and detailing the members carefully will help ensure that the loads reach the
beams, columns and walls as designed.

www.s-frame.com 35 © 2007 Softek Services Ltd.