318 SEISMIC DESIGN OF REINFORCED-CONCRETE STRUCTURES, walls and openings in walls equal to twice the ‘cross-sectional area of the minimum shear reinforce ‘ment required per lineal foot of wall. (b) Shear strength of walls (and diaphragms): For walls with a height-to-width ratio Ay/l, > 2.0, the shear strength is to be determined using the expression: a= GA 20K + Poly) where = 0.60, unless the nominal shear strength provided exceeds the shear correspond- Ing to development of nominal flexural capacity of the wall Aq, = net area as defined earlier iy = height of entire wall or of segment of wall considered width of wall (or segment of wall) in direction of shear force For walls with y/ly < 2.0, the shear may be deter- mined from y= On al + Pof,) where the coelicent a, varies linearly from a value OF 30 For hy/ly = 130 20 for he/ly = 20. Where a Wallis divided into several segments by ‘opening, the value of the ratio h,/Ly to Be used in aleulating V, for any segment i hott be less than the corresponding ratio forthe eaie wal "The nominal shear strength V, of all wall sg- rents or pies resting a common lateral force is not to exceed 84." where A i the total ross sectional area of the walls. The nominal shear Strength of uny individual segment of wall or pit is iff where A, is the crosssee- tional area of the per considered (©) Development length and splices: All continuous re- inforeement is to be anchored or spiced in accor- ance with provisions governing reinforcement in tension, as dscused for flexural members Where boundary elements are present, the tran: verse reinforcement in wall is to be anchored within the confined core of the boundary element to de- velop the yield stress in tension of the transverse reinforcement. SEAOC-86 (UBC-88) further requires that splices in transverse reinforement be siaggered in bars of the same layer as well ax with respect to adjacent bars in another layer, where two curtains oF ein- forcement are used. For sheaf walls with minimum edge reinforce ment, both NEHRP-SS and SEAOC-86 (UBC-88) require that transverse reinforcement terminating at the edges of the walls be provided with standard hooks enclosing the edge reinforcement. Otherwise, the edge reinforcement is 10 be enclosed in U-stir- rups of the same size and spacing as the transverse reinforcement. (4) Boundary elements: Boundary elements are to be provided, both along the vertical boundaries of walls 8nd around the edges of openings, if any, when the maximum extremecfber stress in the wall due to factored forces including earthquake effects exceeds 0.2f/. The boundary members may be discontinued ‘when the calculated compressive stress becomes less than 0415/2 Boundary elements need not be provided if the entire wall is reinforced in accordance with the Provisions governing transverse reinforcement for members subjected to axial load and bending, as given by Equations 9-6 and 9-7 Boundary elements of structural walls are to be designed to carry all the factored vertical loads on the wall, including self-weight and gravity loads tributary to the wall, as well as the vertical forces required to resist the overturning moment due to factored earthquake loads. Such boundary elements are to be provided with confinement reinforcement in accordance with Equations 9-6 and 8-7. Discussion: (a) The use of two curtains of reinforcement in walls subjected to significant shears (ie, > 24,)/f") serves to reduce fragmentation and premature dete- Floration of the concrete under load reversals into the inelastic range. Distributing the reinforcement uniformly across the height and width of the wall helps control the width of inclined cracks. (b) ACI Appendix A allows calculation of the shear strength of structural walls using a coeficient a, = 20. However, advantage can be taken of the greater “observed shear strength of walls with low height-to- width ratios Ay/l, by using an a, value of up to 30 for walls with h,/ly = 15 oF less. ‘The upper bound’ on’ the average nominal shear stress that may be developed in any individual segment of wall (10/f") is intended to limit the degree of shear redistribution among, several con- nected wall segments. A wall segment refers to a part of a wall bounded by openings or by an open- ing and an edge. It is important to note that Section A231 of ACI Appendix A requires the use of a strength- reduction factor $ for shear of 0.6 for all members (except joints) where the nominal shear strength is less than the shear corresponding to the develop- ‘ment of the nominal flexural strength of the mem- ber. In the case of beams, the design shears are obtained by assuming plastic end moments corre- sponding to a tensile steel stress of 1.25f, (see Figure 9-15). Similarly, for a column the design shears are determined not by applying load factors to shears obtained from a lateral load analysis, but from consideration of the maximum developablemoments at the column ends consistent with the axial force on the column, This approach to shear design is intended to insure that even when flexural hhinging occurs at member ends due to earthquake- induced deformations, no shear failure would de- velop. Under the above conditions, ACI Appendix A allows the use of the normal strength-reduction factor for shear of 0.85. When design shears are not based on the condition of flexural strength being, developed at member ends, the code requires the use of a lower shear strength-reduction factor to achieve the same result, that is, prevention of pre- ‘mature shear failure ‘As pointed out earlier, in the case of multistory structural walls, a condition similar to that used for the shear design of beams and columns is not so readily established. This is so primarily because the magnitude of the shear at the base of a (vertical cantilever) wall, or at any level above, is influenced significantly by the forces and deformations beyond the particular level considered. Unlike the flexural behavior of beams and columns in a frame, which can be considered as close-coupled systems (i.e, ‘with the forces in the members determined by the forces and displacements within and at the ends of the member), the state of flexural deformation at any section of a structural wall (a far-coupled sys- tem) is influenced significantly by the displacements Cf points far removed from the section considered. Results of dynamic inelastic analyses of isolated structural walls under earthquake excitation”? also indicate that the base shear in such walls is strongly influenced by the higher modes of response. ‘A distribution of static lateral forces along the hheight of the wall essentially corresponding to the fundamental mode response, such as is assumed by ‘most codes," will produce flexural yielding at the base if the section at the base is designed for such a set of forces. Other distributions of lateral forces, ‘with a resultant acting closer to the base of the wall, ccan produce yielding at the base only if the magni- tude of the resultant horizontal force, and hence the base shear, is increased, Results of the study of isolated walls referred to above, which would also apply to frame-shear-wall systems in which the frame is flexible relative to the wall, in fact indicate that for a wide range of wall properties and input ‘motion characteristics, the resultant of the dynamic horizontal forces producing yielding at the base of the wall generally occurs well below the tworthirds- of-total-height level associated with the fundamen- tal-mode response (see Figure 9-23). This would imply significantly larger base shears than those due to lateral forces distributed according to the funda- ‘mental mode response. The study of isolated walls ‘mentioned above indicates ratios of maximum dy- namic shears to “fundamental-mode shears” (i.e. shears associated with horizontal forces distributed according to the fundamental-mode response, as (CODE PROVISIONS FOR EARTHQUAKE-RESISTANT DESIGN 397. used in codes) ranging from 1.3 to 40, the valve the ratio increasing with increasing fundamental period (see Figure 9-22). (©) Since multistory structural walls behave essentially as vertical cantilever beams, the horizontal trans verse reinforcement is called upon to act as web reinforcement. As such, these bars have to be fully anchored in the boundary elements, using standard 90° hooks whenever possible (@) ACI Appendix A uses an extreme-fiber compressive stress of 0.2/’, calculated using a linearly elastic ‘model based on gross sections of structural mem- bers and factored forces, as indicative of significant compression, Structural walls subjected to compres- sive stresses exceeding this value are generally re- ‘quired to have boundary elements Figure 9-43 illustrates the condition assumed as basis for requiring that boundary elements of walls. be designed for all the gravity loads (W7) as well as the vertical forces associated with overturning of the wall due to earthquake forces (#1). This require ment assumes that the boundary element alone may hhave to carry all the vertical (compressive) forces at the critical wall section when the maximum horizon- tal earthquake force acts on the wall. Under load reversals, such a loading condition imposes severe ‘demands on the conerete in the boundary elements. Hence the requirement for confinement reinforce- ‘ment similar to those for frame members subjected to axial load and bending. Diaphragms of reinforced concrete, such as floor slabs, that are called upon to transmit’ horizontal forces through bending and shear in their own plane, are treated in much the same manner as structural walls. 6. Frame members not forming part of lateral-force- resisting system. Frame members that are not relied on Swi2 Has Wy & Figure 8-48 Loading condition assumed for design of boundary ‘alements of stuctural walls,318 SEISMIC DESIGN OF REINFORCED-CONGRETE STRUCTURES to resist carthquake-induced forces need not satisfy the stringent requirements. governing lateral-load-resisting clements. These relate particularly to the transverse reinforcement requirements for confinement and shear. Non-lateral-load-resisting elements, whose primary function is the transmission of vertical loads to the foundation, need comply only with the reinforcement requirements of ACI Appendix A, in addition to those found in the main body of the code. A special requirement for non-lateral-load-resisting clements is that they be checked for adequacy with respect to a lateral displacement representing the ex ppected actual displacement of the structure under the ‘design earthquake. For the purpose of this check, ACI ‘Appendix A uses a value of twice the displacement calculated under the factored lateral loads, or 2 X 1.7 = 344 times the displacement due to the code-specitied loads. UBC.85 specifies a lateral displacement equal to 3/K times the displacement due to the code forces (K is the horizontal force factor that enters the expression for the design base shear V). With K varying from 0.67 to 2.0, the factor 3/K takes on values ranging from 4.5 to 1.5, NEHRP-85 calls for checking non-lateral-load- resisting elements using a lateral displacement equal to Cy (the deflection amplification factor) times the dis- placement calculated under the code-prescribed forces. For concrete structures in regions of high seismicity, C, varies from 4 to 6.5, depending on the type of structure. ‘The corresponding’ value in SEAOC-86 (UBC-88) is 3R,/8 (Ry, is a coefficient analogous to 1/K in UBC- 85)'times the displacements due to the code-specified lateral forces. For regions of high seismicity, R, varies from 6 to 12, depending on the type of structure. Thus, the factor 3R,,/8 ranges from 2.25 to 4.5. These factors reflect the maximum displacements that may be ex pected under a major earthquake which are generally larger than those produced by the code-specified “equivalent lateral forces.” Under this requirement, the gravity-load system should be capable of maintaining its vertical-load-carrying capacity, without reduction, lunder the specified lateral displacement. Where plastic hhinging can occur under the specified displacement, confinement reinforcement complying with Equation 9-6 or 9-7 has to be provided. These elements, however, are not required to be designed for the moments associ ated with the lateral forces. For gravity-load frame members subjected to fac- tored axial compressive forces exceeding A, f'/10, the following requirements relating to transverse reinforce- ‘ment have to be satisfied: The maximum tie spacing (over the length /, from the face of the joint), X (diameter of smallest longitudinal bar) Sp < | 24 tie diameters ‘(least cross-sectional dimension of column) where 2 (clear height of column) 1, > | maximum cross-seetional . dimension of column 18 in ‘The first tie is to be located within a distance of s,/2 from the face of the joint, The maximum tie spacing in any part of the colun is 25 7. Frames in regions of moderate seismic risk. Al- though ACI Appendix A does not define “moderate seismic risk” in terms of a commonly accepted quantita- measure, it assumes that the probable ground- ‘motion intensity in such regions would be a fraction of that expected in a high-seismic-risk zone, to which the major part of Appendix A is addressed. By the above description, an area of moderate seismic risk would ‘correspond roughly to zone 2 as defined in ANSI-82.°-* For regions of moderate seismic risk, the provisions for the design of structural walls given in the main body of the ACT Code are considered sufficient to provide the necessary ductility. The requirements in ACI Appendix AA for structures in moderate-risk areas relate mainly to frames, The same axial compressive force (A,f’/10) used to distinguish flexural members from columns in high- seismic-risk areas also applies in regions of moderate seismicity. (@) Shear design of beams, columns, or two-way slabs resisting earthquake effects: The magnitude of the design shear is not to be less than either of the following: (1) The sum of the shear associated with the devel- ‘opment of the nominal moment strength at each restrained end and that due to factored gravity loads, if any, acting on the member. This is similar to the corresponding requirement for high-risk zones and illustrated in Figure 9-15, except that the stress in the flexural tensile reinforcement is taken as f, rather than 1.25f, @) The maximum factored shear corresponding to the design gravity and earthquake forces, but with the earthquake forces taken as twice the value normally specified by codes. Thus, if the critical load combination consists of dead Toad (D) + live load (L) + earthquake effects (E)) then the design shear isto be computed from U = 0.75(1.4D + 1.71 + 2(1.876)] (b) Detailing requirements for beams: The positive mo- ‘ment strength at the face of a joint must be at least one-third the negative moment capacity at the same section. (This compares with one-half for high- seismic-risk areas.) The moment strength— positive ‘or negative—at any section is to be no less thanDESIGN EXAMPLES — REPRESENTATIVE ELEMENTS OF A 12.STORY FRAME —SHEARSWALL SURONG 338 ‘one-fifth the maximum moment strength at either end of a member. Stirrup spacing requirements are identical to those for beams in high-seismicerisk areas. (©) Detailing requirements for columns: The tie spacing requirements for columns are identical to those for ‘gravity-load-carrying members, as given above un- der item 6, with the additional minimum spacing of Dis (@) Detailing requirements for two-way slabs without ‘beams: As mentioned earlier, requirements for flat plates in ACI Appendix A appear only in the sec- tion relating to areas of moderate seismic risk. This suggests that ACI Appendix A considers the use of flat plates as acceptable components of the lateral- load-resisting system only for areas of moderate seismicity. Specific requirements relating to flat-plate and flatslab reinforcement for frames in moderate-risk zones are given in ACI Appendix A and illustrated in the Commentary to the Appendix. ‘$5 DESIGN EXAMPLES — REPRESENTATIVE ELEMENTS OF A 12-STORY FRAME - SHEAR WALL A significant part of the damage observed in engineered aldings during earthquakes has resulted from the ef- ‘ets of major structural discontinuities that were inade- ‘quately provided for. The message here is clear. Unless ‘proper provision is made for the effects of major discon- nuities in geometry, mass, stiffness, or strength, ‘Fould be prudent on the part of the engineer to avoid conditions, which are associated with force con- Load ® Load Deformation Usetul Deformation (a) ‘centrations and large ductility demands areas of the structure. Where such unavoidable or desirable from the archi aan analysis to obtain estimates of associated with the discontinuity is SEAOC-86 (UBC-88) provides guidelines for design forces in structures with various types of vertical and plan irregularities. In addition to discontinuities, major asymmetry, with Particular regard to the disposition in plan of the lat- ceral-load-resisting elements, should be avoided when- ever possible, Such asymmetry, which can result in a significant eccentricity between the center of stiffness and the center of mass (and hence of the resultant inertial force), can produce appreciable torsional forces in the structure. Torsional effects can be critical for corner columns or end walls, i¢., elements located far from the center of stiffness. Another important point to consider in the prelimi- nary design of a structure relates to the effectiveness of the various lateral-load-resisting components, particu- larly where these differ significantly in deformation ca- pacity. Efficient use of structural components would Suggest that the useful range of deformation of the principal lateral-load-resisting elements in a structure be of about the same magnitude whenever practicable, ‘This is illustrated in Figure 9-442, which shows Joad-deformation curves of representative elements (1) and (2) in a structure. Such a design allows all the resisting elements to participate in carrying the induced forces over the entire range of deformation. In Figure {9-44b, the resisting elements (1) and (2) not only possess different initial stiffnesses but, more importantly, ex- hibit different ductilities (not ductility ratios) or defor- Deformation (b) Figure 9-44 Relative deformation capaciy in lateral-loac-resisting elements in structure,$20 SEISMIC DESIGN OF REINFORCED-CONCRETE STRUCTURES ‘mation capacities. In such a case, which is typical of a frame-shear-wall structure, the design should be aimed. at insuring that the maximum probable deformation or lateral displacement under dynamic conditions does not exceed the deformation capacity A. of element (2); o, if the maximum expected deformation could exceed A, then clement (1) should be so designed that it can support the additional load that may come upon it when element (2) loses a considerable part of its load- carrying capacity. It is worth noting that, generally, the lateral displacements associated with full mobilization of the ductility of rigid (open) frames are such that significant nonstructural damage can be expected (un- less such movement is anticipated and provided for). ‘The need to tie together all the elements making up a structure or a portion of it that is intended to act as a unit cannot be overemphasized. This applies to the superstructure as well as foundation elements. Where structure is divided into different parts by expansion joints, as when the various parts differ considerably in height, plan size, shape, or orientation, a sufficient gap should be provided between adjacent parts to prevent their pounding against each other. To avoid pounding between adjacent buildings or parts of the same build- ing when vibrating out of phase with each other, a gap equal to at least six times the sum of the maximum lateral deflections of the two structures under the design (code-specified) lateral forces, or the sum of the maxi- ‘mum deflections of the two structures as indicated by a dynamic analysis, would be desirable, ‘A good basis for the preliminary design of an earth- quake-resistant building is a structure proportioned to satisfy the requirements for gravity and wind loads. The planning and layout of the structure, however, must bbe undertaken with due consideration of the special requirements for earthquake-resistant design. ‘Thus, ‘modifications in both configuration and proportions to anticipate earthquake-related requirements should be incorporated at the outset into the basic design for gravity and wind, Essential to the finished design is particular attention to details that can often mean the difference between a severely damaged structure and ‘one with only minor, repairable damage. 9.5.2 Example Designs of Elements of @ 12-Story Frame - Shear Wall Bullding® The application of the earthquake-resistant design pro- visions of ANSI A38.1-1982 (ANSI-82)* with re- spect to design loads and those of Appendix A of ACI “Reproduced, with minor medications, from Reference 9.75, with ‘permission ftom Van Nostrand Reiold Company. 318-83° relating to proportioning and detailing of ‘members will be illustrated for representative elements of a 12-story frame-shear wall building located in seis- mic zone 4. Except for minor variations in local areas, the division of the United States into different seismic . 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4), as adopted by ANSI-82 based on ATC 3.06", is very similar to UBC-85 (or UBC-79, on which most of the other ANSI-82 seismic-design provisions are based). A ‘number of areas classified under zone 1 in UBC-85 are shown as located in zone 0 in ANSI-82, The typical framing plan and section of the structure considered are shown in Figure 9.45a and b, respec- tively. The columns and structural walls have constant cross-sections throughout the height of the building. The floor beams and slabs also have the same dimen- sions at all floor levels. Although the dimensions of the structural elements in this example are within the prac- tical range, the structure itself is hypothetical and has bbeen chosen mainly for illustrative purposes. Other per- 28°26" ner coum 27 12F tamer Came 2°12 Sol oe a and J @ vet | 7 @26°= er ____} 1 a& Hd o Figure 9-45 Structure considered in design example, (8) Typ al floor traming plan. (b) Longtucinal section.DESIGN EXAMPLES — REPRESENTATIVE ELEMENTS OF A 12.STORY FRAME-SHEARAWALL BULDING 321 tinent design data are as follows: Service loads—vertcal * Live load: Basic, 50 Ib/fe?, Additional average uniform load to allow for heavier basic load on corridors, 25 Ib/ft?, Total average live load, 75 Ib/ft2, * Superimposed dead load: Average for partitions 20 Ib/ft. Ceiling and mechanical 10 Ib/ft?, ‘Total average superimposed dead load, 30 lb/ft? Material properties: * Concrete: JE = 4000 Ib/in.?; w= 145 bt? * Reinforcement: f= ksi 1. Determination of design lateral forces. On the ba- ‘sis of the given data and the dimensions shown in Figure 9-45, the weights that may be considered lumped. ‘at a floor level (including that of all elements located ‘between two imaginary parallel planes passing through ‘mid-height of the columns above and below the floor considered) and the roof were estimated and are listed in Tables 9-1 and 9-2. The calculation of the base shear ¥, as explained in Chapter 4, for the transverse and longitudinal directions is shown at the bottom of Tables 9-1 and 9-2. For this example, the importance factor F and the soil factor S have been assigned values of unity. ‘Note that a value K= 0.8 has been used in the trans- verse direction where the structure consists of a frame-shear wall system, while K = 0,67 in the longitu- dinal direction, where moment-resisting frames make up the structure. Calculation of the undamped (elastic) natural periods of vibration of the structure in the transverse direction, as shown in Figure 9-46, using the story weights listed in Table 9-1 and member stifinesses based on gross concrete sections, yielded a value for the fundamental period of 1.34 sec (compared 10 a T value of 0.91 see obtained by the approximate formula given in ANSI-82). ‘The mode shapes and corresponding periods of the first five modes of vibration of the structure in the transverse direction are shown in Figure 9-47, The lateral seismic design forces acting at the floor levels, resulting from the distribution of the base shear in each principal direction, are also listed in Tables 9-1 and 9-2. For example, the seismic lateral force F, at the 10th floor level in the transverse direction is given by (Y= F)w,h, _ (1500 - 96)(124)(2200) SS 2,144,300 = 179 kips Fo Table 8-1 Design Lateral Forces in Transverse (Short Direction (Corresponding to Entire Structure)® Seismic forces Wind forces, Fleorlevel Height Storyweight h,, _Lateralforce Slory shear Wind pressure Lateral force Sion shear Grombare) heft whips fekins Akos EA klps(Average),Ib/R®Hskips TH klpe 12 149 B100.——«st8,000——scos 237 259 (Poot 300 259 1 136 2200 298.000 106 24 505: 496 784 10 14 20073000179, 226 aoa 2 12 2200 246.000 181 a 220 at = 8 100 2200 zao00 ua len 214 467 138 7 e200 183,000 128 bead 206 480 ~_ 6 78 2200 167,000 109 1106 198 432 = 5 oe mm oo wl ad 190 a8 bea 4 oo ee om 182 28 og 3 40220080058 to wa 373 at 2 2 on iC) 159 347 a 1 16 005080020 i 144 367 bua 1500 4988 26300 2144300 1500 4908 {Bare seer, v= Z0C3W, ware C= 1/G8/F) m8 T= 00a) YB, m vanmaree acon, p, ~vu8 Hae D> Yo E.ONOexOan«r¥~ Dea = coseze00) = UTR eo Tabupe Fe OBTTY One SIKICOON oe os, areentng te uFm2 ‘SEIGMIC DESIGN OF REINFORCED-CONCRETE STRUCTURES Table 9-2. Design Lateral Forces in Longitudinal Direction (Corresponding to Entire Structure)® ‘Seismic forces Wind foes Floor level Height Sioryweight wh, Lateral force Slory shear Wind pressure Lateral force Story shear rombase) heft skips ftkips—F,kips EA, Kips (Average), 1B/? Kips TH, Kb 72 1482100 + 208 787 78 (Foo!) 280 78 1" 136 200 + 149 193 183 388 231 10 8 200 + 138 188 149 ° 112 00 + 1m = 180 143 = 8 100 2200 + 109 ue 172 136 = 7 300 i 6 = 186 132 a 6 7% 2200 a 8 =I 180 wz a 5 e200 + 0 baal 160 ne oe 4 52 2200 + sr 140 ma Ley 4 «2200 t “ ee 130 103 Uae a 3 2200 t 30 us ne 94 ve 1 16 2200 + 6 1135; 10.4 93 ian 1180 vase 2600 2144900 1160 rr) “ir logs recon, 7= Gy. where Gx(oncwa wanes = 0535. T= a0asiab}""— 156 see. = 1/ (inf) = 198/108) = 005. Base sre Also listed in the tables are the story shears correspond- ing to the distributed lateral forces For comparison, the wind forces and story shears corresponding to basic wind speed of 75 mi/h and Exposure B (urban and suburban areas), computed as prescribed in ANSI-82, are shown for each direction in Tables 9-1 and 9.2, YL maw crys sre amouty= Gotan = SoS 8) = 146, ny 18D pe = BO7TV = (OGTR GONE) ~ 85 Mom Lateral-load analyses of the structure along each principal direction, under the respective seismic and wind loads, were carried out assuming no torsional effects. The model shown in Figure 9-45 was used for the analysis in the transverse direction. This model consists of three different frames linked by hinged rigid bars at the floor levels. (This device, which imposes Tews (2 Exar Frames Figure 9-46. Analytical madel fr lateral load analysis of structure in transverse direction.DESIGN EXAMPLES — REPRESENTATIVE ELEMENTS OF A 12-STORY FRAME a Relative Dislacement Figure 9-47 _Undamped natural modes and periods of vibration ‘of structure in transverse direction. ‘equal horizontal displacements at each floor level, is ‘used to model the effect of the floor slabs, which gener- ally may be assumed as very stiff in their own planes.) Frame T-1 represents the four identical interior frames along lines 3, 4, 5, and 6, which have been lumped fogether in this single frame, while Frame T-2 repre- sents the two exterior frames along lines 1 and & ‘The third frame, T-3, represents the two identical frame-shear-wall systems along lines 2 and 7. In the longitudinal direction, two linked frames, each similar fo the frame shown in Figure 9-45b, were used to represent the two identical exterior frames L-I along fines a and d and the two identical frames L-2 along ‘ines b and c (see Figure 9-46) The lateral displacements due to both seismic and ‘sind forces listed in Tables 9-1 and 9-2 are shown Longitudinal ‘Wind Lose O02 a 6 BWI 1a 18 18 202228 Lateral Displacement (in) Figure 9-48 Lateral displacements under seismic and wing loads. plotted in Figure 9-48. Although the seismic forces used to obtain the curves of Figure 9-48 are approximate, the results shown still serve to draw the distinetion between wind and seismic forces, that is, the fact that the former are external forces the magnitudes of which are propor- tional to the exposed surface, while the latter represent inertial forces depending primarily on the mass and stiffness. properties of the structure. Thus, while the ratio of the total wind force in the transverse direction Table 9-3 Distribution of Horizontal Selsmic Story Shears among the Three Transverse Frames Shown in Figure 9-46 Frame 7-3 Frame T-1 Frame T-2 interior (exterior Leth ‘trames) a Story ‘Story Sot shear, level shear total Kips 12 163 ot 300 " 115 2 496 10 297 “a 129 19 ers 9 306 36 133 16 836 a a6 2 138 14 980 7 321 29 40 13 1106 6 39 26 140 2 1215 5 307 24 134 10 1307 4 285 a 28 8 1382 3 202 7 105 7 1440 a 205 14 a8 6 1480 1 48 7 2 1 1500324 SEISMIC DESIGN OF REINFORCED-CONCRETE STRUCTURES to that in the longitudinal direction (see Tables 9-1 and 9-2) is about 3.5, the corresponding ratio forthe seismic forces is only 1.3. As a result of this and the smaller lateral stiffness of the structure in the longitudinal direc- tion, the displacement due to seismic forces in the longitudinal direction is significantly greater than that in the transverse direction. By comparison, the displace- ments due to wind are about the same for both direc- tions. The typical deflected shapes associated with pre- dominantly cantilever or flexure structures (as in. the transverse direction) and shear (open-frame) buildings (as in the longitudinal direction) are evident in Figure 9-48, The average deflection indices, that i, the ratios of the lateral displacement at the top to the total height of the structure, are zh; for wind and 7; for seismic loads in the transverse direction. The corresponding values in the longitudinal direction are =f for wind and 5 for seismic loads. ‘An idea of the distribution of lateral loads among the different frames making up the structure in the trans- verse direction may be obtained from Table 9-3, which lists the portion of the total story shear at each level resisted by each of the three lumped frames. Note that atthe top (12th floor level), the lumped frame T-1 takes 121% of the total story shear. This reflects the fact that in frame-shear-wall systems of average proportions, interaction between frame and wall under lateral loads results in the frame “supporting” the wall at the top, while at the base most of the horizontal shear is resisted by the wall. Table 5-3 indicates that for the structure Table $-4 Summary of Design Moments for Typical Beams on Sixth Floor of Interior Transverse Frames along Lines 3 through 6 (Figure 9-46) ou [raps im (o20) Cte ue [otetatinstee) oa aps eae (or) Beam AB Deion moment pe Tear apa ™ ora 2 oa 6 — on Snowy ont 28 = nena +70 a oe Seevey ot a0 Sideonay tole we Design moment pe 3 wi-sen z oa “9 a oe ‘Seenay'o ht +00 Seon tt +60 7 exe See ht + -27 Siena let ”