Cyclic Shear Behavior of High-Strength Concrete Structural Walls

Abstract

High-strength concrete (HSC) walls having compressive strength of approximately 100 MPa (14,500 psi) were tested under cyclic lateral loading to investigate their shear behavior. The parameters included were height-to-length ratio of the walls, vertical and horizontal web reinforcement ratios, and the effects of boundary elements in the form of flanges. The experimental results show that shorter walls exhibit greater shear strength than taller walls. Both vertical and horizontal web reinforcements contribute significantly to increasing the shear strength of the walls, with the horizontal web reinforcement being more effective for walls having height-tolength ratio from 1.0 to 2.0. With increase in height-to-length ratio of walls, the concrete contribution to the shear strength decreases while the web reinforcement contribution increases. The presence of flanges also significantly increases the shear strength of HSC walls. Experimental wall shear strengths from this study as well as from literature were compared with predictions from the ACI Code and Eurocode provisions. It can be seen that both ACI and Eurocode do not give consistent safety factors. The ACI method can be unsafe for low-strength concrete walls, while the Eurocode is overly conservative in almost all cases.

Evaluation of a Reinforced Concrete Wall Macroscopic Model for Coupled Nonlinear Shear-Flexure Interaction Response

“…This may be attributed to the adoption of FSAM theory in the model. The other validation of cracking patterns for rectangular RC walls is presented in Figure 11, which shows the comparison of the cracking patterns for specimen J4 [14]. It can be observed that the model is able to predict the global cracking patterns of the specimen.…”

“…Additionally, cracking pattern of the model was extracted from Open Sees to be compared to the tested specimens. The specimens used to validate the results of rectangular RC walls were taken from specimen SW4 [12], SW21 and SW25 [13], and J4 [14]. Furthermore, models for flanged RC walls were taken from specimen J7 [14], and F1 [15].…”

“…The specimens used to validate the results of rectangular RC walls were taken from specimen SW4 [12], SW21 and SW25 [13], and J4 [14]. Furthermore, models for flanged RC walls were taken from specimen J7 [14], and F1 [15]. The last, for the barbell-shaped RC walls, the specimens were taken from specimen M05C [16], B5 [15], LW2 [17], B3 [18], and W1 [19].…”

“…The experimental test results of two flanged RC wall specimens, namely J7 [14] and F1 [15], were used to validate the output of the model. Firstly, Figure 4 shows the comparison of hysteretic curve of specimen J7 [14]. The ultimate loads predicted by the model were 843.70 kN in the positive direction and 869.65 kN in the negative direction.…”

“…In this paper, cracking patterns are presented only for rectangular and barbell-shaped RC wall specimens. Rectangular RC walls are represented by specimen SW4 [12] and J4 [14] while barbell-shaped RC walls are represented by specimen B5 [15] and W1 [19]. Figure 10 shows the comparison of cracking patterns for specimen SW4 [12].…”