LATERAL STIFFNESS CHARACTERISTICS OF TALL

REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS UNDER SERVICE

LOADS
CHUN-MAN CHAN,* FENG NING AND NEIL C. MICKLEBOROUGH
Department of Civil Engineering, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology,
Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong, Peoples Republic of China
SUMMARY
This paper presents an analytical method for quantitatively predicting the effects of cracking on the lateral
deection and stiffness characteristics of tall reinforced concrete buildings under service loads. The effects of
cracking in tall reinforced concrete buildings can be considered using an element stiffness reduction model. This
model determines the probability of cracking occurrence by dividing the area of the moment diagram, S
cr
, where
the working moment exceeds the cracking moment by the total area of the moment diagram, S. A practical
cracking analysis method can be established by integrating the proposed stiffness reduction model with an
iterative algorithm and commercial linear nite element analysis package. The proposed method has been
validated by good agreement of results between the numerical computation and experimental testing of large-scale
rigid-frame and wall-frame structural sub-assemblages. The effectiveness of the numerical analysis method is also
illustrated through a practical 40-storey reinforced concrete building example. The cracking effects on the lateral
deection and stiffness characteristics of this building were analysed both explicitly and quantitatively. Copyright
2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
1. INTRODUCTION
Cracking is an inevitable phenomenon in tall structural concrete buildings because of the low tensile
strength of concrete. The cracking of structural concrete generally leads to the reduction of the lateral
stiffness and thus an increase in lateral deection of tall buildings. In consideration of the
serviceability limit states, excessive lateral deection may cause inappropriate functioning of non-
structural components such as elevators and doors, severe cracking and consequent loss of stiffness,
and redistribution of load to non-load-bearing partitions, inlls, cladding or glazing. For these
important points, the provision of adequate stiffness, particularly lateral stiffness, is a major
consideration in the design of tall reinforced concrete buildings.
Current standardse.g. the ACI Building Code since 1971 (ACI Committee 318, 1995), CAN3-
A233-M94 (1994) and AS 36001994 (1994)generally provide serviceability requirements
together with empirical relationships that account for cracking in simple members, predominantly
those of beam type members, and the limitations of lateral deection and inter-storey drift of tall
THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL BUILDINGS
Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received October 1999
Accepted February 2000
* Correspondence to: Chun-Man Chan, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong
Kong.
Assist. Professor.
Research Assistant.
Assoc. Professor.
buildings. In contrast with the member analysis, no methodology is recommended in these codes of
practice to consider the effects of cracking in the analysis of large multistorey reinforced concrete
building structures. Analyses of reinforced concrete structures are essentially carried out on the basis
of linear elastic theory by either neglecting the nonlinear effects of concrete cracking or considering it
by arbitrarily reducing the stiffness of cracked members. Consequently, it is quite probable that there
are tall reinforced concrete buildings associated with these designs that cannot meet the serviceability
requirement of either the top lateral deection or inter-storey drift, or alternatively are excessively
conservative. Hence it would be benecial to develop an analytical method for accurately assessing the
lateral deections and stiffness of tall buildings, accounting for the effect of nonlinearity due to
concrete cracking.
Researchers and engineers have made signicant advancements in nite element procedures for
structural analysis in the past several decades. Two approaches have been gradually formed for
reinforced concrete, namely the microscopic element and the macroscopic element approach (Polak,
1996). The microscopic element approach considers the structures to be divided into many small nite
elements and the stressstrain relationships of concrete and steel are adopted to model the concrete and
the steel elements, respectively (ASCE Stat-of-the-Art Report, 1982). The discrete crack model (Mufti
et al.,1972; Ingraffea and Gerstle, 1985) and the smeared crack model (Rashid, 1968; Barzegar, 1989)
are applied to simulate crack propagation. The discrete crack model appears to be signicantly restricted
when applied to tall reinforced concrete buildings, since complicated mesh renements become
necessary to accommodate the propagation of only a fewdiscrete cracks. The application of the smeared
crack model encountered a number of numerical difculties that were later solved by introducing the
shear retention factor. The selection of the shear retention factor, however, appears to be dependent on
the experience of analysts and the requirements for numerical stability with no signicant validation of
experimental data. Tension stiffening introduced by Scanlon and Murray (1974) was modelled
indirectly by inclusion of the descending branch in the tensile stressstrain curve, so called tension
softening behaviour despite some confusion between the two terminologies (Kotsovos and Pavelovic,
1995). On the other hand, the macroscopic element approach incorporates such factors as the cracking
effect, bonding behaviour and mechanical aggregate interlock into a comprehensive constitutive model
of reinforced concrete. Several material property models have been derived directly from experimental
results, such as the modied compression eld theory of Vecchio and Collins (1986) and the effective
stiffness relationship of Branson (1963) which is, however, restricted to application on simple beamand
slab structures.
In this paper, a general effective stiffness model is proposed to determine the relationship between
exural stiffness reductions and various moments due to loading applied to the members. The most
signicant feature of the proposed model is its extensive applicability to members that are subjected to
various load types. This effective stiffness model can be considered as a general constitutive model for
members in tall reinforced concrete buildings. If the force redistribution and ensuing coupled stiffness
reduction among members in structures are considered by using an iterative algorithm, a practical
cracking analysis system can be established by integrating the proposed effective stiffness model and
those iterative algorithms with commercial packages of linear nite element analysis. The advantage
of this system is the ability to predict the lateral deection and stiffness of reinforced concrete building
structures under service load conditions explicitly and quantitatively.
2. ANALYSIS OF CRACKING EFFECTS
Since the monolithic system is a distinct characteristic of reinforced concrete structures, and these
structures behave as indeterminate structures, appropriate equations that describe the force
deformation relationships, equilibrium and deformation compatibility can be fully satised by the
366 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
linear nite element method (LFEM) when the cracking effects are not signicant. Using these
methods, internal element forces such as moment, shear, and axial force can readily be obtained. These
LFEM analyses are commonly used in todays structural engineering design ofces.
For tall reinforced concrete buildings the lateral drift, affected signicantly by cracking effects,
becomes one of the important design criteria, and therefore cracking effects need to be considered in
the analyses. The major difculty with nonlinear cracking analyses is that the stiffness of the cracked
members needs to be reduced according to the extent of crack formation occurring in the members.
Moreover, such stiffness reduction may result in internal force redistribution, which will further affect
the occurrence of cracking. To cope with this difculty, a load incremental procedure has been
developed. In this procedure, the cracked members are rst identied at a specic service load level
and their element stiffnesses are then reduced accordingly using the following probability-based
effective stiffness model. The effective stiffness model provides the nonlinear forcedeformation
relationships for the cracked members.
2.1. Probability-based effective stiffness model
Figure 1 shows the effect of cracking in a exural beam member. Where the applied moment, M(x), is
smaller than the cracked moment M
cr
dened as
M
cr
=
(
v
f
r
)I
uncr
y
t
(1)
where f
r
= exural tensile strength of concrete = 06
_
f '
c
MPa, y
t
= distance from centroid of gross
section to extreme bre in tension,
v
= axial compressive stress, the uncracked regions have a
moment of inertia represented by I
uncr
, equivalent to the gross uncracked moment of inertia which
accounts for the contribution of reinforcing steel to the stiffness. In the region where the applied
moment, M(x), is larger than or equal to the cracked moment, M
cr
, the exural tensile cracks develop in
Figure 1. Cracking in a reinforced concrete beam
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 367
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
the tensile bres of the exural member and propagate gradually towards the neutral axis causing the
moment of inertia of the cracked section to be reduced to the value I
cr
.
The occurrence of cracking at a section is dependent in some manner on the value of the moment,
which in turn is determined by the shape and magnitude of the moment diagram due to the external
load. The larger the magnitude of moment, the greater is the probability that a crack will occur. The
shape and the magnitude of the moment diagram are the main factors affecting the probability of crack
formation of a reinforced concrete member.
The probability density function determining the occurrence of the random variable when the
moment is larger than a certain value, can be expressed as
p(x) =
M(x)
S
(2)
where M(x) is the moment distribution function and S is the total area of the moment diagram. Hence
the probability that the moment value is larger than M
cr
can be obtained by integrating the probability
density function p(x) in the region where M(x) _M
cr
,
P[M(x) _ M
cr
[ =
Z
M(x)_M
cr
M(x)
S
dx =
S
cr
S
(3)
in which S
cr
= the area of the moment diagram segment over which the working moment exceeds the
cracking moment M
cr
. The probability of the moment value being less than M
cr
is
P[M(x) < M
cr
[ =
Z
M(x)<M
cr
M(x)
S
dx
= 1
Z
M(x)_M
cr
M(x)
S
dx
= 1 P[M(x) _ M
cr
[ (4)
The probability of occurrence of cracked sections P
cr
associated with the outcome I
cr
, the cracked
moment of inertia, is determined by equation (3):
P
cr
= P[M(x) _ M
cr
[ (5)
while the probability of occurrence of the uncracked section P
uncr
with outcome I
uncr
, is derived in
equation (4) as
P
uncr
= P[M(x) < M
cr
[
= 1 P
cr
(6)
Hence, the expected value of moment of inertia, the so-called effective moment of inertia, of the
reinforced beam subjected to a certain type of loading is
I
e
= P
uncr
I
uncr
P
cr
I
cr
= (1 P
cr
)I
uncr
P
cr
I
cr
(7)
368 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
The advantage of the proposed model, represented in equation (7), is that the effective stiffness I
e
is
determined from the probability of the occurrence of cracking. This probability is dened as the ratio
of the area of the moment diagram segment over which the working moment exceeds the cracking
moment M
cr
, to the total area of the moment diagram. The proposed model has been veried by a series
of experimental tests taking into consideration different loading congurations (Ning, 1998) and by
other recent publications on the subject (Al-Zaid et al., 1991). This concept can also be extended from
the analysis of the beams and slabs to columns and shear walls with dominant exural cracking
behaviour (Mickleborough et al., 1999).
2.2. Iterative Integrated cracking analysis method
The analysis method presented in Figure 2 provides the history of the nonlinear behaviour of
reinforced concrete structures due to cracking, by applying the external loads in an incremental
manner. The force redistribution and the cracked moment M
cr
affected by the change of axial force are
updated in every load increment, which in turn determines the stiffness reduction of reinforced
concrete members for the subsequent increment. These coupled variations can be adjusted to trace the
physical propagation of cracking in the reinforced concrete structures from iteration to iteration. The
steps for the proposed method are described as follows and shown in Figure 2.
Step 1. For n = 1, where n is the incremental number, all members of the reinforced concrete structure
Figure 2. Flowchart of iterative analysis procedureload incremental method
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 369
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
are considered to be initially uncracked. The full lateral service load is divided into N load
increments, such that each load increment has a value equal to DF. Initially the applied load is
set as F
l
= DF.
Step 2. The load F
(n)
is applied to the structure, and the internal moment M
(n)
i
,axial force A
(n)
i
and
lateral deection D
(n)
are computed using linear nite element software.
Step 3. The element cracking moment (M
cr
)
(n)
i
is updated by considering the element axial force A
(n)
,
according to equation (1).
Step 4. If M
(n)
i
_ (M
cr
)
(n)
i
,then the ith member is deemed to be a cracked member; the exural
stiffness, (I
unc
)
i
, is then reduced to the effective exural stiffness, (I
e
)
(n)
i
,using equations (3)
and (7) based on the probability of cracking.
Step 5. If M
(n)
i
< (M
cr
)
(n)
i
,cracking is considered not to occur in the ith member, hence the exural
stiffness maintains the uncracked values (I
uncr
)
i
.
Step 6. If n >N, the iteration proceeds to Step 7; otherwise F
(n 1)
= F(n) DF and n = n 1, and
the analysis proceeds to Step 2 to repeat the incremental load analysis and to determine the
current effective stiffness of the structure.
Step 7. The iterative procedure terminates with the nal effective stiffness of the structure and the
lateral displacement of the structure determined under the specied lateral load.
A disadvantage of this method maybe that the best value of the load increment, DF is not readily
obvious and this load increment may become a critical parameter affecting the accuracy of calculation.
Generally a larger value of DF may cause a larger error, while a smaller DF lead to more accurate
results. A relatively large incremental load step may not detect the initial cracking sequence of various
members, which in turn may cause some discrepancies at the onset of cracking. The magnitude of the
errors from the actual solution is dependent on the discrepancies in the actual effective stiffnesses in
the current iteration and the equivalent effective stiffnesses determined in the previous iteration, which
in turn are dependent on the value of the load increment, DF.
3. EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION
Two full-size structural sub-assemblage tests were conducted to investigate the behaviour and stiffness
characteristics of indeterminate reinforced concrete structures under service load. Two types of planar
structures were involved, namely: a rigid frame and a wall-frame structure. These structures are typical
of the lateral load resisting systems in high-rise buildings, and it is considered appropriate to study
these systems for the proposed iterative integrated nonlinear analysis accounting for cracking effects.
The purpose of these tests is to validate the applicability and determine the limitations of the proposed
analytical method on these types of structures. The wall-frame test has been used to expand the range
of its application to more general tall building systems containing shear walls as components to resist
the lateral load due to either wind or earthquake. Detailed experimental programs are presented. This
experimental work is followed by the comparison of the analytical predictions and experimental
results.
3.1. Frame: structure and material details
The moment resisting frame was fabricated with a centre-to-centre span of 3000mm, a rst storey
height of 1170mm (including a steel pin joint height of 170mm forming the pin joined base), a second
storey height of 2000mm, and an overall height of 3670mm. The section dimensions of columns were
250mm wide by 375mm deep and the section dimensions of beams were 250mm wide by 350mm
deep. The frame was connected to the rigid ground of the laboratory strong oor by two fabricated
steel pin joints. This form of boundary condition assumes that, in the rigid frame analysis, points of
370 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
inection are located at approximately the mid-heights of the columns of every storey. Figure 3 shows
the elevation and lateral view of the frame structure and details of the pin joints. This frame structure
can be considered as a sub-assemblage in tall reinforced concrete rigid frame buildings.
The columns of the frame were reinforced with three No. 20 deformed bars each as top and bottom
reinforcement, as well two No. 20 bars placed at the neutral axis and No. 10 closed stirrups with
150mm spacing used as shear reinforcement. The beams were designed with three No. 20 deformed
bars as bottom reinforcement, three No. 20 bars as top reinforcement and similar shear reinforcement
as the columns. Commercially produced and supplied concrete was used, and the concrete had a
compressive strength of 29MPa and a Youngs modulus of 15700MPa. Table I presents detail
properties, dimensions and reinforcement of the frame specimen.
3.2. Wall-frame: structure and material details
The wall-frame structure chosen for investigation was a single-span, two-storey reinforced concrete
structure. The difference between the frame and wall-frame was in the inclusion of a wall
(750mm180mm in cross-section) to replace a column in the frame structure. The boundary
conditions were also changed from the pin-joint to a xed base connection, since it was assumed that
Figure 3. Layout and dimensions of the test frame
Table I. Detail properties, dimensions and reinforcement of rigid-frame Specimen
Member b (mm) h (mm) d
c
(mm)
i
(%)
c
(%)
I
umcr
(10
6
mm
4
)
I
cr
(10
6
mm
4
)
B1-6 250 350 50 126 126 1254 585
B2-5 250 350 50 126 126 1254 585
C1-2 250 375 40 188 113 1601 804
C2-3 250 375 40 188 113 1601 804
C4-5 250 375 40 188 113 1601 804
C5-6 250 375 40 188 113 1601 804
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 371
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
there was no longer an inection point occurring in the shear wall. The beam span between the column
centreline and the wall centreline was 2100mm and the typical storey height was 1500mm. The frame
was supported on a reinforced concrete base with dimensions 400mm wide, 400mm thick and
3400mm long. The frame and the base were built integrally. The overall height of the wall-frame
structure was 3575mm. The beams and columns had the same rectangular cross-section as those used
in the frame structure. Figure 4 shows the overall geometry of the wall-frame structure.
The columns of the wall-frame were reinforced with three No. 20 deformed bars, each as top and
bottom reinforcement, and No. 10 closed stirrups at 150mm spacing as shear reinforcement. The
beams were designed to have similar main reinforcement and shear reinforcement as the frame
specimen. The wall was reinforced with two layers of six No. 20 steel bars distributed evenly in the
section and No. 10 @ 150mm stirrups. From the cylinder tests, the concrete had a compressive
strength of 36MPa and Youngs modulus of 19000MPa. Table II presents detail properties,
dimensions and reinforcement of the frame specimen.
3.3. Frame: load and instrumentation details
The testing setup involved the application of a total vertical axial load of 200kN to each column and
maintenance of this load in a force-controlled mode throughout the test by a device called a gravity
load simulator. This device approximates true gravity load and is used together with tension-loading
hydraulic actuators (Yarimci et al. 1967). The load line of this system is such that when the sidesway is
between 0mm and approximately 200mm, the load remains vertical and moves with the sidesway of
the structure. Since the actual lateral deections are generally less than 100mm, no horizontal
component of vertical load was induced. A lateral hydraulic actuator with 400kN capacity was
installed on the laboratory reaction wall. Lateral load was then monotonically applied in a stroke-
controlled mode at a rate of 002kNs
1
, until the ultimate capacity of the frame was achieved.
To monitor the behaviour during testing, the frame model was extensively equipped with electronic
instrumentation. Fourteen displacement transducers (LVDTs), positioned at key points around the
Figure 4. Details of geometry of wall-frame specimen
372 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
structures, were used to monitor both lateral deection and vertical deformation. A load cell attached
to the lateral actuator measured the applied lateral load and two load cells monitored the vertical loads.
The resolution of LVDTs and loading system were 001mm and 001kN respectively. All
experimental data from the applied loading and horizontal and vertical deformations were recorded
by a DATA LOG system at regular intervals of ve seconds. Figures 5 and 6 show the detail setup of
this reinforced concrete rigid frame and wall frame experiments.
3.4. Experimental and analytical Investigation
Figure 7 compares the analytical prediction for the proposed method with both the elastic prediction
and experimental load-deections. The linear nite element method predicts values of 46 and 47% of
the measured test values for the lateral deections at the 2nd and 1st storeys, respectively, loaded to
70% of the ultimate lateral load level (i.e. 140kN). The proposed method gives predictions of 83 and
85% of the experimental values. At a load level of 50% of ultimate (i.e. 100kN), the predictions of the
linear elastic method give 55 and 58% of the experimental deections; however, the predictions of the
proposed method, which considers the cracking effects, give 92 and 95% of the test results. Within the
Table II. Detail dimensions and reinforcement of wall-frame specimen
Member b (mm) h (mm) d
c
mm Ten. bars
t
(%)
Comp.
bars
c
(%)
I
uncr
(10
6
mm
4
)
I
cr
(10
6
mm
4
)
Beam 250 350 50 3T20 126 3C20 126 1146 464
Column 250 375 40 3T20 112 3C20 112 1450 607
Base 400 400 50 8T20 179 6C20 135 2618 908
t (mm) b
w
(mm) d
c
(mm) Ver. bars
v
(%)
Hori.
bars
h
(%)
I
uncr
(10
6
mm
4
)
I
cr
(10
6
mm
4
)
W, 2nd 180 750 50 12V20 279 20H10 058 7685 2983
W, 1st 180 750 50 12V20 279 20H10 058 7685 2983
Figure 5. Rigid-frame test setup
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 373
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
serviceability loading range, the assumption of linear elastic behaviour is relatively inaccurate since
the rst abrupt stiffness reduction caused by initial cracking of structural members usually appears at a
very low lateral load level. In contrast, the proposed method accounts very well for the cracking effects
with stiffness reduction. This method not only predicts lateral deection with a high degree of
accuracy at a value of load equal to approximately half of the ultimate capacity, but also gives an
estimation of behaviour at 70% ultimate load with an acceptable degree of accuracy. The proposed
method is most applicable in the serviceability loading range, beyond which signicant discrepancies
will be found as shown in Figure 7. Such discrepancies are primarily due to the fact that concrete and
steel materials become inelastic and nonlinear near ultimate limit states.
The major advantage of the proposed incremental load method is that the historical variation in the
exural stiffness reduction for every member in the reinforced concrete structure can be shown
explicitly. This feature can provide design engineers with signicant information on the consequences
Figure 6. Wall-frame test setup
Figure 7. Loaddeection comparison among analysis results of proposed method, elastic method and
experimental results
374 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
of cracking in the concrete members and therefore also minimize the uncertainty of stiffness reduction
in the lateral load resisting systems. Figure 8 illustrates the quantitative analytical results of the
exural stiffness reduction of the six members involved in the test frame. As indicated in Figure 8, the
beams at the 1st and 2nd storeys crack initially at the 25 and 35kN lateral load level, respectively, and
their exural stiffnesses reduce quite rapidly after the initial cracking. At the lateral load of 70kN, both
columns on the lateral loading side, C4-5 and C5-6, start to crack, while the exural stiffness reduction
ratios of the beams at the 1st and 2nd storeys have already reduced to 054 and 060, respectively. A
signicant amount of the load carried by the beams has been transferred to columns C4-5 and C5-6 and
as a consequence cracking has occurred in those columns. The columns on the opposite side of the
lateral loading, namely C1-2 and C2-3, crack at very different lateral load levels with the upper storey
column cracking at the 75kN load level, and the lower storey column cracking at the 95kN load. This
behaviour is due to the axial compression forces in these columns being greater than those of the
columns on the loading side, and maximum axial force occurring in the column at the lower storey on
the opposite loading side.
3.5. Wall-frame: experimental and analytical Investigation
Figure 9 presents the analytical prediction using the proposed method together with experimental
results for the loaddeection response of the 1st and 2nd storey levels; 5kN is chosen as an
appropriate load step. At the three lateral load levels of 175, 210 and 245kN (equivalent to 50, 60 and
70% of the ultimate load of 350kN) there are generally only insignicant differences between the
predictions of the proposed method and the test deections. These differences are 2, 2 and 4% at the
2nd storey level and 4, 10 and 18% at 1st storey level, respectively. Such discrepancies are considered
acceptable in a practical engineering sense even though larger errors were found when the lateral load
was larger than 70% of the ultimate load. The comparison presented indicates that the proposed
method can be applied to wall-frame structures to capture the lateral deection with consideration of
the cracking effects in the serviceability loading range.
The quantitative variation of the exural stiffness reduction of each member, including the walls in
the wall-frame structure, is also presented explicitly in Figure 10. This gure indicates that the beams
at the 1st and 2nd storey start to crack at lateral loads of 55 and 65kN and their exural stiffness
Figure 8. Flexural stiffness reduction of members in the rigid-frame test
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 375
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
reduces rapidly after initial cracking. At 110kN (approximate 30% of the ultimate load), the 1st
column starts to crack and the exural stiffness reduction ratios of beams at the 1st and 2nd storeys
have already decreased to a value of 064 and 076. The 2nd column cracks at a lateral load level of
175kN (approximate 50% of the ultimate load). When the lateral load level reaches 205kN
(approximate 59% of the ultimate load), initial cracks start to occur in the shear walls. In considering
the results of the two respective frame and wall-frame tests, the beams are the rst members in these
structures to experience cracking and to have their stiffness reduced to a value below 50% of their
gross moment of inertia.
4. EXAMPLE OF A 40-STOREY REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING
A 40-storey, 140m high, wall-frame building, with storey height 35m, is considered in this analytical
Figure 9. LoadDeection comparison between analysis results of proposed method and experimental results
Figure 10. Flexural stiffness reduction of members in the wall-frame test
376 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
study. Reinforced concrete is used as the structural material, in which the design strength and Youngs
modulus of the concrete are assumed to be 30 and 24800MPa, respectively, and the Youngs modulus
of the steel is assumed to be 200000MPa. The typical oor live load is 15kPa. The design wind
pressures in accordance with the Code of Practice on Wind Effects Hong Kong (1983) are taken as
12kPa within the lower 30m of the boundary height, and 19, 24 and 30kPa in the ranges 3050m,
50100 and 100150m, respectively. The maximum allowable lateral deection is taken to be H/500
where H is the building height. Idealized xed boundary conditions are assumed at the supports.
Figure 11 shows the typical oor plan with columns located on a grid of 5300 7000mm. The
beam span is 7000mm in the y-direction and 5300mm in the x-direction. The typical section size of the
beams is 625mm deep by 300mm wide, while the lintel beams between two shear walls at every storey
have cross-section 800mm deep by 400mm wide. Two kinds of column are chosen, one with a cross-
section of 800mm by 800mm being used for the 1st to 20th storeys, and 750mm by 750mm being
used for the 21st to 40th storeys. The typical thickness of oor slab is 150mm. In addition, four
sections of wall are used at every storey to strengthen the lateral stiffness in the short direction of the
building. Two kinds of cross-section of the walls are designed. At the 1st to 20th storeys, the dimension
of the wall is 7800mm wide by 400mm thick. The cross-section of the wall is 7750mm by 350mm
from the 21st to 40th storeys. The details of reinforcement ratios and design properties are presented in
Tables IIIV.
5. DISCUSSION OF ANALYSIS RESULTS
Figure 11 presents the typical oor layout and the two loading conditions acting on the tall building in
the x- and y-directions. Figure 12 presents the lateral loadtop deection relationships with various
load increments under y-direction loading. In this gure, F represents the full service wind load
determined from the design wind pressure along the height of the building, N stands for the load
increment number used in the incremental analysis. The dashed vertical line represents the limiting
Figure 11. Typical oor plan
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 377
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
lateral drift ratio of 1/500 for this building. A total of ve different load increments are selected in the
comparisons. N = 1 is used to represent elastic analysis without reducing the stiffness of the members
due to cracking. N = 3, 10, 40, 200, are used to represent load increments equivalent to 100/3 = 33%,
100/10 = 10%, 100/40 = 25% and 100/200 = 05% of the full service load. Using linear elastic
analysis, the lateral top deection is found to be 024m, indicating that the lateral drift ratio has a value
of 1/584, which satises the serviceability limit of 1/500. However, when fully accounting for cracking
effects, the proposed method with 40 load increments predicts that the value of top deection is
0312m, representing a lateral drift ratio of 1/449, which is 30% more than that of the elastic
prediction. Such a result implies that, if concrete cracking is taken into account in the analysis, the
lateral serviceability performance of the building becomes unsatisfactory and this particular structure
does not meet the code criteria for lateral drift.
Loadtop deection curves resulting from the use of various load increments are presented in Figure
12. By means of a number of incremental load analyses, accelerated convergent behaviour is found.
The top deection calculated with three load increments is found to be 22% more than the linear elastic
prediction, while the prediction of 10 increments is 30%. In addition, the curves of 40 and 200 load
increments are very close, and these predictions of the top deection at full service load do not show
signicant deviation from the values calculated by 10 load increments. This feature of convergence
Table III. Section dimension and properties of columns (A = area; I
uncr
I
cr
= gross, cracked-moment of inertia)
Column at storey
Section (mm
2
)
Cover (mm)
(%)
Steel A (m
2
) I
uncr
(m
4
) I
cr
(m
4
)
120 800 800 3% 064 004626 002062
50 24 f 32
2140 750 750 21% 056 003297 001169
50 24 f 25
Table IV. Section dimension and properties of beams (A = area; I
uncr
I
cr
= gross, cracked-moment of inertia)
Beam at storey
Section (mm
2
)
Cover (mm)

l
(%) (top)
(%) (bottom) A (m
2
) I
uncr
(m
4
) I
cr
(m
4
)
B4 4036 400 800 50 1, 6 f 25 1, 6 f 25 032 002132 000775
B4 3531 400 800 50 13, 8 f 25 13, 8 f 25 032 002274 000983
B4 3026 400 800 50 16, 8 f 28 16, 8 f 28 032 002419 001185
B4 251 400 800 50 21, 8 f 32 21, 8 f 32 032 002637 001475
Other 40-1 300 625 50 08, 4 f 28 08, 4 f 28 019 000848 000395
Table V. Section dimension and properties of shear walls (A = area; I
uncr
I
cr
= gross, cracked-moment of inertia)
Wall at storey
Flange (mm)
Web (mm)
(%) (Ver. Steel)
(%) (Hori. steel) A m
2
I
uncr
m
4
I
cr
m
4
120 800 800 30, 24 f 32 376 2700 663
400 08, 42 f 25
2140 750 750 21, 24 f 25 331 2280 418
350 022
378 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
has an instructive signicance for application of the method in practical design. Generally, this method
with 10 load increments, where each load increment is equal to approximately 10% of the full service
load, can provide very accurate prediction as well as efciency in terms of computational time.
Figure 13 presents the exural stiffness of individual cracked members at the 40th storey calculated
using 200 load increments. The coupling beams B4 are found to be critical members where cracks are
rst caused by lateral load. The sudden stiffness reductions in B5, B7, B8 and B10 at the very
beginning of the iteration process are mainly due to the initial applied dead and live gravity loads.
These reduced beam stiffnesses remain basically constant during the entire application of lateral loads.
Several beams at the interior span, such as B2, B4, B6 and B9, exhibit greater stiffness reductions since
a larger shear force is taken by the beams of the interior span.
Figure 12. Lateral loaddeections with various load increments in the Y = direction, 40-storey building example
(F = full lateral load N = 1 = elastic analysis N = 3, 10, 40 and 200 Df = 33%, 10%, 25% and 05% full lateral
load)
Figure 13. Flexural stiffness reduction of cracked member at 40th Storey of the 40-storey building example
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 379
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
It is also noted that points of discontinuous reduction rates occur and are shown in the stiffness
reduction curves of the beams at the interior span with increasing lateral loads. This is apparently due
to the action of constant negative moments, which are generated at both ends of those beams from the
vertical gravity load such as dead and live loads. On the other hand, increasing positive moment at one
end, and negative moment at the other end, are caused by the lateral load with increasing load
increments. The superposition of these two moment diagrams results in the cracks occurring at the end
where two negative moments appear together rst, followed by cracking at the other end when the net
moment is larger than the cracked moments of those members. The probability of crack occurrence
increases abruptly at that moment, leading to discontinuous stiffness reduction rates observed in some
curves shown in Figure 13.
Moreover, the nal stiffness reductions of members B1, B2 and B3 at the full service load are
presented with respect to each storey in Figure 14. The x-axis in these gures contains three ranges of
0100%, to present variations of stiffness of the beams at three locations in the layout of the building.
Owing to the characteristics of the wall-frame building, the shear force resisted by the frame is smaller
at the lower storeys where the shear walls take a large amount of the shear force. The shear force in this
case is the main factor generating the moments in the beams. Hence, from this gure, lower stiffness
reductions are found in beams located in the 1st5th storeys. From the 6th to the 30th storeys, the most
severe stiffness reductions occur in all beams since larger components of the shear force are resisted by
the frame structures.
Not all the beams exhibit the same cracking effects in their stiffness characteristics. The interior
beam (B2) indicates approximately 50% stiffness reduction above the 5th storey. The beams located
leeward are categorized into another group that has approximately 60% of the gross moment of inertia
between the 5th and 30th storeys and 7090% of the uncracked values beyond the 30th storey. The
windward beams are found to have the least stiffness reductions, but the variations of the stiffness
reductions in those beams at the mid-height of the building are larger than the values at both the top
and bottom storeys.
The top deection in the x-direction is calculated by using 10 load increments. Unlike the wall-
frame behaviour of the building under Y-direction wind loading, this tall building can be considered as
a frame-type structure under X-direction wind loading. Hence, the stiffness of the beams contributes
Figure 14. Reduction of exural stiffness of B1, B2, B3 in the 40-storey building example under y-direction lateral
load
380 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
more to the overall lateral stiffness in this type of structure and loading. The uncertainty of the element
stiffness due to cracking effects has been captured by the proposed method. Concrete cracking causes a
68% increase in the top deection in the X-direction and a 38% increase in the Y-direction, as indicated
in Table VI. Under frame action in the X-direction of the building, most of the beams are found to
crack severely at the lower storeys and have reduced stiffness to values of approximately 50% of their
original stiffness, as shown in Figure 15. Owing to the large gravity load of the building, the cracked
moments in the vertical members are signicantly increased and only minor cracking is found in the
windward vertical members at the 1st storey of the 40-storey building under respective X and Y-
direction lateral loads.
6. CONCLUSIONS
61. An effective stiffness model, based on the probability of cracking in the reinforced concrete
members, has been presented and integrated into a linear nite element package in an incremental
manner to take account explicitly and quantitatively of the cracking effects on the lateral stiffness of
tall reinforced concrete buildings.
62. The proposed method can be used to determine the loaddeection history of reinforced concrete
buildings. The advantages of this approach are that it is computationally more efcient and more direct
than the typical nonlinear nite element analysis method.
Table VI. Comparison of top deection of elastic and proposed method along x- and y-directions
Top deection analyses along x- and y-direction
Wind direction Elastic Drift Proposed Drift D
crack
x 0265 1/529 0446 1/314 68%
y 0240 1/583 0312 1/449 31%
Figure 15. Reduction of exural stiffness of B11, B12, B13 in the 40-storey building example under x-direction
lateral load
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 381
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
63. Validation of the proposed method has been presented by the results of tests conducted on a rigid-
frame and a wall-frame structure.
64. Within a load level up to about 70% of ultimate, the exural stiffness reduction due to cracking is
found in the tests to be the dominant factor in the resulting nonlinear loaddeformation response of
reinforced concrete structures. Beyond the range up to approximately 70% of ultimate, material
nonlinearity becomes a signicant factor in the behaviour of reinforced concrete structures.
65. Cracks occurring in the beams of tall reinforced concrete buildings are found to be the main factor
in the loss of lateral stiffness for lateral load resisting systems.
66. The effects of cracking on the top lateral deections of structures are dependent on the type of
lateral load resisting system. The increase of the lateral top deection of rigid-frame structured due to
cracking effects is found to be more than that of wall-frame structures. The greatest reduction in beam
stiffness occurs at approximately 1/3 of the height of wall-frame structures, but in the lower storeys of
rigid-frame structures.
7. NOTATION
A
i
n
= the axial force of the ith member in the nth iteration
D
(n)
= the lateral deection of an RC structure at the nth iteration
f'
c
= the ultimate strength of concrete
f
r
= the modulus of rupture of concrete
F
(n)
= the applied force at the nth iteration
I
cr
= the cracked moment of inertia
I
e
= the effective moment of inertia
(I
e
)
i
(n)
= the effective moment of inertia of the ith member in the nth iteration
I
g
, I
uncr
= the uncracked moment of inertia
(I
uncr
)
i
(n)
= the uncracked moment of inertia of the ith member in the nth iteration
M,M(x) = the moment distribution on the member
M
cr
= the cracking moment in a concrete exural member
M
i
(n)
= the moment distribution of ith member in the nth iteration
(M
cr
)
i
(n)
= the corresponding cracking moment of the ith member in the nth iteration
N = the total iteration number corresponding to the load increment
p(x) = the probability density function
P
cr
= the probability of occurrence of cracked sections associated with the
outcome I
cr
P
uncr
= the probability of occurrence of uncracked section with outcome I
uncr
S = the total area of the moment diagram
S
cr
= the area of the moment diagram segment over which the working moment
exceeds the cracked moment M
cr
y
t
= the distance from centroid of gross section to extreme bre in tension

v
= the axial compressive stress
DF = the load increment
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was supported by the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong under Project No. HKUST-
543/94E, and was based upon the research conducted by Mr Feng Ning under the supervision of Neil
Mickleborough and Chun-Man Chan for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of
Civil Engineering at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong.
382 C.-M. CHAN ET AL.
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)
REFERENCES
ACI Committee 318, 1995. Building code requirements for reinforced concrete (ACI 318-95). American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, MI.
Al-Zaid RZ, Rajeh Z, Al-Shaikh AH, Abdulrahman H, Abu-Hussein MM, Mustafa M. 1991. Effect of loading
type on the effective moment of inertia of reinforced concrete beams. ACI Structural Journal 88(2): 184190.
AS 36001994, 1994. SAA concrete structures code, Standards Association of Australia, Sydney.
ASCE State-of-the-Art Report, 1982. Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete. Structural Division
Committee, ASCE Special Publication, New York.
Barzegar F. 1989. Analysis of RC membrane elements with anisotropic reinforcement. Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE 115(3): 647665.
Branson DE. 1963. Instantaneous and time dependent deection of simple and continuous reinforced concrete
beams. Alabama Highway Research Report No. 7, Bureau of Public Roads.
CAN3-A233-M94 1994. Design of concrete structures for buildings. Canadian Standards Association, Toronto,
Canada.
Ingraffea AR, Gerstle W. 1985. Non-linear fracture models for discrete crack propagation. In Application of
Fracture Mechanics to Cementitious Composites, Shah SP. (ed.). The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus-
Nijhoff; 171209.
Kotsovos MD, Pavlovic MN. 1995. Structural ConcreteFinite Element Analysis for Limit-State Design.
London: Thomas Telford.
Mickleborough NC, Ning F, Chan CM. 1999. Prediction of the stiffness of Reinforced concrete shear walls under
service loads. ACI Structural Journal 96(6): 10181026.
Mufti AA, Mirza MS, McCutcheon JO, Houde J. 1972. A study of the nonlinear behavior of structural concrete
elements. Proceedings of the spec Conference on Finite Element Method in Civil Engineering, Montreal,
Canada.
Ning F. 1998. Lateral stiffness characteristics of tall reinforced concrete buildings under service loads. PhD
dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.
Polak MA. 1996. Effective stiffness model for reinforced concrete slabs. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE
122(9).
Rashid YR. 1968. Analysis of prestressed concrete pressure vessels. Nuclear Engineering and Design 7(4): 334
344.
Scanlon A, Murray DW. 1974. Time dependent reinforced concrete slab deection. Journal of Structural
Division, ASCE 100(9): 19111924.
Vecchio FJ, Collins MP. 1986. The modied compression eld theory for reinforced concrete elements subjected
to shear. ACI Journal Proceedings 83(6): 219231.
Yarimci E, Yura JA, Lu LW. 1967. Techniques for testing structures permitted to sway. Experimental Mechanics
7(8).
RC BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS UNDER SERVICE LOAD 383
Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Build. 9, 365383 (2000)