Diaphragms and Shear Walls
    Lecture 3

    Arch 721, Structural Design for Dynamic Loads, University of Virginia
    Copyright © 1996-2006 Kirk Martini. 06-Sep-2006 7:52
    Table of
    Contents

    Today's Topics

    • Diaphragm behavior and idealizations
    • Shear wall behavior
    • Construction issues


    Diaphragm behavior and idealizations

    Rigid diaphragms, symmetry, and relative stiffness


    All frames equal stiffness

     

    Symmetrically arranged & equal stiffness means equal resistance
         Under the rigid diaphragm idealization, the symmetrically arranged identical frames experience the same deflection, and provide equal resistance.



    Center frame is twice as stiff

    All frames equal stiffness

     

      Symmetrically arranged & unequal stiffness means resistance is proportional to stiffness
           When the stiffness of the center frame is doubled compared to the outer frames, it offers twice as much resistance as those frames.
      Relative stiffness
      When structural elements are linked so that their displacements are equal, they resist loads in proportion to their stiffness.
      Stiffness "attracts load"
      An element which is twice as stiff will carry twice as much load, provided displacements are equal.


      What happens if we stiffen the frame on the right, rather than the frame in the center? How will the loads be distributed?


    Third frame is twice as stiff

    All frames equal stiffness

      Unexpected result
           Stiffening the frame on one end increases the forces in the frame at the other end


    Third frame is twice as stiff

    Third frame is twice as stiff
      Torsion
           Stiffening one end frame moves the center of stiffness away from the resultant of the load, inducing torsion: the structure twists.
      Frame displacements are not equal
           With torsion, the displacements of the three frames are not equal
      Relative stiffness applies only when displacements are equal
           With torsion, relative stiffness does not apply, forces will not be distributed in proportion to stiffness
      Local actions and global consequences
           With rigid diaphragms, a change in one part of a structure can have significant effects on other, possibly remote, parts.


      Real diaphragm behavior

      A concrete slab vs. an ideal rigid diaphragm


    Concrete slab

    Ideal rigid diaphragm

    Concrete slab
      In a real diaphragm, the displacements are not ideally equal
           The deformation of the diaphragm allows the center frame to deflect more, so each of the outer frames reduces by about 4 kips, so that the center frame gains about 8 kips compared with the ideal.
      The Rigid diaphragm assumption can often reasonably approximate a concrete diaphragm
      Reinforced concrete floor slabs and concrete-topped steel deck can often be reasonably approximated by rigid diaphragm behavior, provided that diaphragm is significantly stiffer than the vertical frames or shear walls


      A plywood diaphragm vs. an ideal rigid diaphragm


    Plywood diaphragm

    Ideal rigid diaphragm

    Plywood diaphragm
      With a plywood diaphragm, the force distribution is very different from the rigid diaphragm
           The deformation of the diaphragm allows the center frame to deflect more, so each of the outer frames reduce 20 kips, so that the center frame gains nearly 40 kips, compared with the ideal rigid diaphragm.
      The rigid diaphragm assumption poorly approximates a plywood diaphragm
           The plywood diaphragm is very flexible relative to the frames.
      Tributary width is a better idealization
           The distribution of loads to the frames is close to the tributary width assumption, with approximately half the load going to the center frame, and one quarter each to the outer frames.


      What happens to the wood and concrete diaphragms if we stiffen one of the end frames? How will it influence the distribution of forces in each case?

      Real diaphragms and unsymmetric stiffness


    Plywood diaphragm

    Concrete diaphragm

    Plywood diaphragm

    Concrete diaphragm
      Timber: frame stiffness has little effect on the distribution of forces.
           The diaphragm is not stiff enough to make the building twist as a unit. Each panel deflects like a simple beam, distributing approximately half of its load to each end, regardless of the stiffness of the frame.
      Concrete: frame stiffness has much more influence on the distribution of forces.
           The behavior is much closer to the ideal rigid diaphragm, where the twisting action induces larger forces in the end frame that is not stiffened.

      Relative Stiffness of diaphragm and vertical elements

       


      Lessons

      Irregular distribution of stiffness is an important concern for rigid diaphragm buildings.
           Adding stiffness to one portion of a rigid-diaphragm structure can cause induce torsion, resulting in significant problems in other parts.
      Concrete is typically modelled as a rigid diaphragm
      Plywood and bare steel deck are typically modelled as flexible diaphragms


      Shear Walls

       

    Arch 721, Structural Design for Dynamic Loads, University of Virginia
    Copyright © 1996-2006 Kirk Martini. 06-Sep-2006 7:52
    Table of
    Contents