尊敬的
微信汇率：1円 ≈ 0.046078 元
支付宝汇率：1円 ≈ 0.046168元
[退出登录]
雅虎竞拍
煤炉代买
paypay商城
乐天二手
日本亚马逊
乐天新品
ZOZOTOWN
1. The study examines the effect of shear walls on the seismic performance of reinforced concrete open ground storey frame buildings. 2. Linear static and nonlinear static analyses are used to compare the performance of open ground storey buildings with and without shear walls. Various multiplication factors are applied to model strengthened configurations. 3. The results show that shear walls improve the capacity of open ground storey buildings to resist seismic forces but strengthening comes at a higher comparative cost.
![International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 06 | June-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2820
configuration of the position based on the sharp arm, clay
and its position.
1.2.2 Shear wall - frame Interaction
This system has a combination of thorn wall and RC
frame. The potential of wall-frame structureis completely
dependent on the horizontal linter action, which is
controlled by the stiffness of the reinforced concrete
frames and shear walls and the height of the building. The
taller the structure and the stiffer the RC frames, the big
the interaction. The RC frame is deflected in the shape
mode while the shear wall is responding in bending as a
cantilever. The structural compatibility of lateral
deflection develops interaction between them.
The laterals way of the RC frame combined with theshear
wall deflected in the parabolic sway results in improved
stiffness of this system significantly because the shear
wall is effectively restrained by the moment frame at the
level while the bottom level at the moment, the moment
frame is Restrained by the shear wall Therefore, the
combined action of structural elements is really based on
the lative rigidity of the two and their corresponding
modes of deflection. The horizontal deflectionsofaRCare
more than a cantilever column. At the bottom, the wall
work is relatively stiff and therefore, the floor to floor
deformations will be less than half the values at the top.
On the top floors, the lateral deflection increases rather
easily due to the cumulative effect of the shear wall
rotation. On the other side, RC frames were adopted. The
relative deflections of the store basically based on the
value of the shear force applied to the floor ofeach storey.
However, the lateral deflection is greater than thebottom
level and the lower level in comparison to the shear wall,
the floor to floor deformations can be considered almost
uniform. When the current system is connected to a
thoracic wall-frame system using strong diaphragm
action, they are made in a uniform store. Consequently,
the typical interaction results in a much more economical
structural system.
2. OBJECTIVES OF CURRENT STUDY
The broad purpose of current research is described here.
1. Open Ground Storage RC frame buildings to study the
impact of the distribution of thorn wall in geological
performance.
2. To study the comparative effectiveness of common
open ground story buildings with strong thorn wall,
combined with OGS buildings by implementing various
MFs.
3. Cross section executes comparative cost analysis of
worn walls with reference.
3. Methodology
The methodology followed by the above mentioned
objectives.
1. A broad literature review.
2. Selection of typical four storey Open Ground Storey RC
frames.
3. Linear static analysisof RC frameswithoutconsideringthe
effect of masonry infill as per Indian Standard.
4. Design of RC wall and underground and first-levelcolumns
with various stereotypical functions of four times OGS
building.
5. Modeling of the selected frame buildings to capture non
linear behavior.
6. Performance comparison of the buildings in terms of
nonlinear static push over curves
7. Comparative cost analysis of each strengthening scheme.
REFERENCES
[1] Apurba Mondal, Siddharth Ghosh and G.R. Performance
based evaluation of the engineering structure of Reddy
Dyncle RC frame, 56: 1808-1819 2013
[2] CVR Murty IITK-BMTPC Earthquake Tips: Learning
Earthquake Design and Construction National Information
Center of Earthquake Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Kanpur, 2005.
[3] Bungale S Taranath. Reinforced concrete design of tall
buildings CRC Press, 2009.
[4] CVR Murty, Rupen Goswami, AR Vijaya Narayanan, and
Vipul V Mehta. Some earthquake behaviors of buildings
Gujarat State Disaster Management Authority, Government
of Gujarat, 2012
[5] CVR Murty and Sudhir K Jain. Beneficial effectofmasonry
infiltration on walls In 12th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering (Auckland, New Zealand, January
30), 2000.
[6] Robin Davis, Processa Krishnan, Devdas Menon and A
Mehra Prasad 13th World Conference on Geographic
Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2004.
[7] Hemant B Chowdhury, Durgesh Si Rai and Sudhir K Jain
Stress-strain characteristics of clay brick catch under
continuouscompression. Civil Engineering Materials,19(9):
728-739, 2007.
[8] Santiago Pujol, Amado Benvenant-Clint, Mario E
Rodriguez and J Paul Smith-Pardo. Magnificent wall walls:
The low-growth snow concrete building structure is an
effective alternative to strengthen earthquake. 14th World
Conference Earthquake Engineering (Beijing,China,October
12th October), 2008.]()
