] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

["Andy Heigley" <aheigley(--nospam--at)jgaeng.com>]

I would like to get an idea of what programs people like using for modeling
multiple floors of concrete shearwalls in buildings, in order to calculate
forces on the walls, drift, rotation etc....

anybody have any good recommendations?

Andy Heigley, PE


-----Original Message-----
From: Ali Karimzadegan [mailto:karimzadegan(--nospam--at)pidec.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:46 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Concrete Shear Wall / Shear Cores


I believe that the effective flange width of the shear wall that is
mentioned in ACI is for considering the shear lag effect and if your model
is realistic with FE it will be automatically considered in your model
results.

Best Regards,
A. Karimzadegan
St. Dept.
P.I.D.E.C
Tel. : +98-711-2270120

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Still [mailto:robs(--nospam--at)adcengineering.com]
Sent: 2005/10/04 04:40 ب.ظ
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Concrete Shear Wall / Shear Cores

I have a question in modeling concrete shear walls configured in a tube,
like that found around a stair or elevator. My question is related to a
possible difference in how the building should be modeled to calculate
drift, and how it should be modeled to design the walls to ACI.

ACI chapter 21, limits the effective flange width of a shear wall to 1/4
the wall height. If I use this criteria the "flange" of the tube is not
fully effective, thus the structure should not be modeled as a tube, but
two "C"
shaped sections.

The question arises in that Two "C" shaped sections potentially have far
less moment of inertia than the tube section, depending on how much of
the tube flange is effective in the "C's".

So should the building be modeled assuming tube behavior, or "flanged"
behavior for calculating drift?
It appears to be evident that by ACI that it should be modeled using
"flanged" behavior.

Furthermore, if Chapter 21 is not applicable should the effective flange
be limited by the same criteria as if it were a "Tee Beam?"

Any comments / assistance would be greatly appreciated.


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********