Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Study On Interaction Between Rocking Wall System and Surrounding Structure - ACI2016 - Spring - AndyLiu
Study On Interaction Between Rocking Wall System and Surrounding Structure - ACI2016 - Spring - AndyLiu
Background
Research Objectives
Experimental Program
Conclusions
Background Rocking wall and Rocking wall
system
Introduction of Rocking Walls
V
Longitudinal reinforcement is not
integrated with foundation
Precast wall contact with
foundation
Unbonded strands only yield at
Limited energy dissipation
large drifts
Concrete spalls
Introduction in corner
of Rocking Wall System
Concrete spall
Add external fuses to increase
energy dissipation capacity
Background PreWEC system
Introduction of PreWEC (Precast Wall with End Columns) System
Less
Residual drift
residual
O-connector
for energy
dissipation
Floor
damaged?
surrounding structure
Experimental Program Prototype
building
Prototype and Representative Test
Specimen
Edge column
Prototype structure N
PreWEC PreWEC
6 story office building
Lateral resisting system
(N-S)
- 3 rocking walls + Floor slab
columns
Representative Test
Specimen
Test single frame line
Focus on interaction at first
Simulate
story missing stories
with steel mega beam
providing representative
BCs and restraints
Experimental Program Design philosophy
Design Philosophy of the Tests Two Specimens
PFS1
Useand PFS2:
PreWEC systems with the same strength (gravity load in the
floor ignored)
Use different wall-floor connections to maximize/minimize wall-floor
interaction
Compare the performance of the two specimens
End columns
End columns
WALL
G CIP
SLAB PT
CIP unbonded
slab
WALL
REBARSTRAN
Component test
D
of a mega beam
Rebar and
Design of specimen PFS1 strands
Experimental Program Second
specimen PFS2
Key Design Factors of PFS2 - Minimize Interaction Using
Precast
Construction:
Use special wall-floor connections that only transfer horizontal
forces
Transfer gravity load to the two end columns next to wall (non-
Use mega
bearing beams pin-connected at ends to emulate five floors
wall)
WALL
Vertic
al slot PLAN
K
G/2 G/2
Precast plank
WALL
FLOOR Victory
connectio
n
Victory connection
Design of specimen PFS2 (Courtesy: BS Italia.inc)
Experimental program Loading protocol
Loading Protocol of PFS1 and PFS2
Cyclic pseudo-static loading
Main control lateral displacement applied at top block
Three cycles per drift level ACI ITG 5.1
Example: Loading protocol
for PFS1
5%
4%
2.5% 3%
2%
1.5%
Biaxial
loading
In-plane (butterfly-
loading shaped)
Experimental program - Test results of PFS1
PFS1: Test Results
Floor
(Bottom)
Edge
Wall column
Floor (Top)
O-
connecto
r
Wall
Wall: Minor damage at 5% drift reusable without
repair Structural integrity of floor was maintained
Floor:
Concrete crushed locally at wall-floor interface
Floor self-debonded from wall corners and damage was not
aggravated
Most cracks in floor closed after testing due to prestressed
force in PT strands
O-connectors: Fracture occurred only after 4% drift -
(the lightly
expected
Comment: stressed strands
Fast reoccupation remained
of the building elastic
possiblethroughout the
with limited
Experimental program - Test results of PFS2
PFS2: Test Results
Wall Wal
l West East
Preca
st Gravity loaded east end
plank
columns at 2%
(Emulate G/2)
CIP
floor
Flag-
WALL
shaped
Localized damage in the CIP floor
Very small in PFS1
Wall
residual drift
Preca
st
plank
Hysteretic curves of PFS1 & PFS2 and
pushover curve of the isolated PreWEC Little damage in the precast floor in
system PFS2
Conclusion
Two rocking-wall assemblages were successfully tested. PFS1 was
constructed with CIP rigid wall-floor connections; PFS2 was
constructed with precast members and vertical isolation wall-floor
connections.
Conclusion
s:
Both specimens exhibited reasonable self-centering capacity
Floor
WALL
Localized damage
@ wall-floor connection
Move the wall-floor A simplified 2D analytical model
connection Moment demand at wall-floor
towards the wall connection:
center:
Reduce
Increase
Moment demand would be
Reduce
reduced
Design recommendations
Recommendation of end columns when using vertical isolation
connection Observation in the test
of
PFS2
Spalling of fiber grout
beneath the east end
column
Shortening of west end
column
Impact of due
the to loss of in end
damage
concrete core
columns
Loss of clamping PT force
West end column at
End columns pulled up
East end column
5% column
End O-connectors nullified due to
loss of relative vertical
Confinement deformation
(HSS tube Additional out-of-plane
etc.)
deformation
Design on the floor
recommendations
Increase end column
Fiber grout in
the pocket confinement or use external
confinement
West end column Use high-strength fiber grout or