Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations pierreick on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Seismic Design + Wall-Beam Connections in Dual Systems

Learner24

Civil/Environmental
Nov 9, 2024
2
Hello everyone,

I am new to structural engineering, and I love to pay attention to details. I have two parts to clarify.

I need advice on the best way to design and model a dual system (special moment-resisting frame + shear walls) for seismic performance. My goal is to ensure proper confinement in beam-column joints and optimize seismic performance. Specifically, I prefer wider beams (at least 0.75 of the column width) and square columns for better performance in both directions.

Part 1.

First, I have a doubt about how to solve these two details when connecting beams and shear walls:

1737622302250.png

"In the first detail, the beams are wider than the shear walls, so the beam will not fully rest on the wall. Should we match the widths of the beams and columns, for example, to 300 mm?
1737624888004.png


In the second detail, the beams are again only partly supported by the wall. Would it be better to reposition the wall so that both beams are fully supported, or to add a column at the junction?
1737624930377.png


Part 2.

When it comes to solving above problems, what are the best layouts options in terms of seismic performance while also being practical?

Options:

  1. Columns on All Grids + Shear Walls Between Columns:
    • Combine the shear walls with columns
    • 1737622735468.png
  2. No columns at shear wall locations
  3. 1737625252072.png
  4. "Plus"-Shaped Columns: Use "+" shaped columns with same width of columns, beams, and shear walls.
    • 1737625376783.png
  5. Rectangular Columns:
    • Use rectangular columns and match the widths of columns, beams, and walls.
    • 1737625465038.png

Questions:

  • Which of these options is best for seismic performance and practical implementation?
  • What are the pros and cons?

Sorry for long question, and thanks for answering.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

I can only answer for Part 1
The general practice in my region is to have flush the beam with the column/wall.
In your case, if the column/wall is 300mm Width then the beam should be 300 as well otherwise it is aesthetically awful.
If flushing is not possible, I would add a beam that is perpendicular to the wide beam at the beam-column connection, in this case, it is aesthetically better.

For the second part, the easiest way is to relocate your outer column so that the beam can always flush with the core wall.
The reason is I don't think we can shift the shear wall as it may be part of the lift system so I wont shift anything to it, at least for my region。
If this is not the option, I will shift the shear wall as your second image.

I seen people putting the column as of your third image but it is not a preferred solution in my region, my clients always wanted to have a flush surface.


For Part 2
I have not yet have experience in designing a building with seismic so I think I will wait for the expert to enlighten us.
 

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor