Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Analytical study on energy consumption and damage to cylindrical and I-shaped

reinforced concrete shear walls subjected to cyclic loading
Naohiro Nakamura a,∗ , Naohiko Tsunashima b , Tomio Nakano c , Eizaburo Tachibana d
a
Research & Development Institute, Takenaka Corporation, 1-5-1, Ohtsuka, Inzai, Chiba 270-1395, Japan
b
Nuclear Power Division, The Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc., Osaka, Japan
c
Newjec Inc., Osaka, Japan
d
Osaka University, Osaka, Japan

article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: An analytical study using the nonlinear finite-element method was conducted for reinforced concrete
Received 6 March 2008 shear wall tests under cyclic loading to estimate the damage from the aspect of energy consumption. First,
Received in revised form the validity of the analytical method was confirmed by studying the load–displacement relationship, the
17 December 2008
condition of the cracking, and a comparison between the total strain energy of the analysis and the loaded
Accepted 17 December 2008
Available online 16 January 2009
energy of the test. Next, the distribution of the energy consumption was investigated, and the division
between rebars and concrete was studied. It was determined that energy consumption is an effective
Keywords:
method for estimating damage of shear walls.
Reinforced concrete © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Shear wall
Energy consumption
3D-FEM
Nonlinear analysis

1. Introduction Damage estimation using the amount of energy consumed can

The finite element method (FEM) is useful for structural
analyses of reinforced concrete (RC) structures. Many studies,
following the first conducted by Scordelis et al. in 1967 [1],
have resulted in improvements in the constitutive models and
development of solutions to static cyclic loading and dynamic
problems [e.g., [2,3]]. Furthermore, to validate these methods,
numerous experiments were performed [e.g., [4,5]], and many
researchers continue to improve the accuracy and practicality of
the methods [e.g., [6–9]].
The authors investigated the ultimate behavior of nuclear
power plant buildings at their failure stage, using five times
the design-level ground motion [10], and the effects of the
soil–structure interaction [11] by conducting seismic response
analyses using detailed nonlinear FEM models of the buildings.
In the seismic design of nuclear power facilities in Japan,
nonlinear seismic-response analyses of buildings have been
performed mainly using lumped-mass system models and the
shear–strain of each storey has been used as a damage assessment
index. When FEM is used, local damage to each part of the building
can be understood in detail. However, estimating damage to the
entire building is necessary for seismic design.
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 476 47 1700; fax: +81 476 47 7744.
E-mail address: nakamura.naohiro@takenaka.co.jp (N. Nakamura).
0141-0296/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.12.013
be considered for this purpose. In order to estimate the damage
to an RC structure, a number of investigations based on energy
absorption ability have been carried out recently [e.g., [12,13]]. A
fragility assessment method in which consumed energy is used as
an index has been proposed as well [e.g., [14,15]].
However, the results of these studies were obtained mainly
from beams and columns that rupture because of bending. The
mechanisms of energy consumption and the energy absorption
ability in the case of shear failure are not well understood yet.
There are few examples of energy estimation with regard to shear
walls that are greatly affected by shear deformation. This energy
estimation is important, especially for nuclear power facilities. In
particular, the distribution and allotment of energy consumption
in shear walls have not always been investigated satisfactorily
because they are difficult to measure experimentally.
In RC nonlinear analyses, the damage conditions are estimated
generally using figures of concrete cracks, rebar yielding condi-
tions, etc. They provide important information about the damage
condition. However, the information is completely separated be-
tween concrete and rebar at each position. On the other hand, since
energy consumption is a common and unified index, it is an effec-
tive estimation tool for surveying the total damage conditions. It
can elucidate how the energy inputted to the specimen by the im-
posed loads is shared between the concrete and rebar, and clarify
1000 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009

Fig. 1. Outline of layered shell element for reinforced concrete.

Fig. 2. Uni-axial stress–strain before cracking.

how the shared energies are distributed, absorbed, and connected

to different failure modes.
As a basic study on the energy assessment of cylindrical and
I-shaped shear walls (hereafter referred as ‘‘RC shear walls’’),
Fig. 3. Crack and yield surface.
the energy consumption and damage to the RC shear walls
subjected to cyclic loading performed in simulation analyses in
past experiments are investigated, in this study.
First, the results obtained from the experiments of the
load–displacement relationship and cracking are compared with
the analytical results to confirm the accuracy of the analysis. Next,
the relationship between rotational angles and hysteretic absorbed
energy (hereafter referred to as consumed energy) is investigated
to confirm the validity of the hysteresis models used in the analysis.
Furthermore, the distribution of the energy consumed in the test
specimen is investigated. In particular, by dividing the burden of
rebars and concrete, the characteristics of the energy consumed
for each are investigated and compared with the damage
conditions.
Fig. 4. Envelope curve of stress–strain of concrete.
2. Analysis method
occurs, the stress–strain relationship of the point can be expressed
In this study, simulations of tests are performed using the as follows:
3D nonlinear analysis method. The validity and efficiency of the (
1σ1
) "
E1 (ε1 ) 0 0 1 ε1
# ( )
analysis program used in this study were confirmed by simulation 1σ2 = 0 E2 (ε2 ) 0 · 1 ε2 (1)
analyses of many shear wall specimens, i.e., cyclic loading tests [16] 1τ12 0 0 G12 (γ12 ) 1γ12
and dynamic shaking table tests [17,18]. An outline of the analysis
method is shown below. where σ1 and ε1 are the stress and strain, respectively, in the
The RC wall is modeled using layered shell elements fabricated direction perpendicular to the crack surface; σ2 and ε2 are the
by substituting layers for rebars and concrete under consideration stress and strain, respectively, in the direction parallel with the
of the antiplane bending (see Fig. 1). The nonlinearity of materials crack surface; and τ12 and γ12 are the shear stress and strain,
is considered for the in-plane stress–strain components, and the respectively, along the crack surface.
out-of-plane shear component is dealt with as linearity. Note that in this equation, the direction of the second crack is set
at right angles to the direction of the first crack. Fig. 4 indicates the
envelope curve of the stress–strain relationship for both directions
2.1. Modeling of concrete (σ1 –ε1 and σ2 –ε2 ) used in Eq. (1). The curve was determined based
on Fafitis and Shar [19] and Stevens et al. [20].
The uniaxial stress–strain relationship of concrete before Moreover, the compressive stiffness and strength in the
cracking was approximated from a tri-linear curve, as shown in direction parallel with the crack surface is reduced by the constant
Fig. 2. As shown in Fig. 3, before cracking, the concrete is an coefficient λ, based on the following equation proposed by
elasto-plastic body, which conforms to the Drucker–Prager yield Naganuma [21]:
condition.
The cracked concrete is expressed using the smeared crack λ = 0.74 − σc2 /255. (2)
model. The first crack occurs when the main tensile stress reaches In this study, the value of λ was set as 0.63 for all specimens.
σcr at each Gaussian point in each concrete layer. Once a crack This value corresponds to σ c2 = 29 N/mm2 . The hysteresis
 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009 1001

Fig. 5. Hysteresis curve for the stress in the case of cyclic loading.

curve for the stress–strain relationship in the case of cyclic

loading was approximated using a hyperbola based on the results
of investigations carried out by Stevens et al. [20] and Karsan
Fig. 6. Shear stiffness after cracking.
et al. [22] (see Fig. 5).
The hyperbolic function fitted between points b and c shown
in the figure was determined using the positions of points b and c
as well as the gradient at point b. The maximum tensile value was
applied to point c and the gradient at point b was set as a slope
(Ep ) connecting point a and the plastic strain point (εp , 0). εp can be
calculated using the following equation [22]:

εp εmax 2 εmax
   
= 0.145 + 0.13 (3)
εc2 εc2 εc2
εmax and εc2 indicate the maximum compressive strain and the
strain in the case of the maximum compressive stress, respectively.
Fig. 7. Hysteresis curve of reinforcement.
Furthermore, the hyperbolic function between points d and e was
determined by both the positions of points d and e and the gradient
at point e. As for the position, the decrease in the stress caused 2.2. Modeling of rebars
by cyclic loading was considered, as shown in the following. The
gradient was set to be 0.9 times the value at point b. The rebars were considered uniaxial materials in a bar arrange-
Yamada et al. [23] proposed an experimental formula (Eq. (4)) ment direction with a bilinear restoring force corresponding to the
concerning the decrease in the strength in the case of cyclic loading kinematic hardening rule, as shown in Fig. 7. The second gradient
by conducting constant strain amplitude cyclic compressive tests. was set to be 1/100 of the initial stiffness. It was assumed that the
n, σ1 , and σn in Eq. (4) indicate the number of cyclic loading, steel bars are completely bonded to the concrete.
the stress for the maximum strain in the case of the initial cyclic
loading, and the stress at the nth loading stage, respectively. The 2.3. Estimation of energy quantum
coefficient a, which is a function of the compressive strain ε
obtained from the tests, is expressed as Eq. (5). The total amount of external energy (W ) that has been input
Under the condition that Eq. (4) can also be applied to the to the test specimen is indicated in Eq. (7) as the sum of imposed
random strain amplitude in this paper, Eq. (6) was used. σn in this loads. M in this equation represents the number of loading points.
equation indicates the compressive stress caused by the previous Pi and δi indicate the load and the displacement in a loading
cyclic loading for the maximum compressive strain (εmax ), and direction at point i, respectively.
σn+1 is the stress for the same strain as that caused by the new In cases where the loading is carried out at a low speed, the
cyclic loading with consideration to the decrease in the stress. kinetic energy as well as the absorbed energy due to viscous
damping can be neglected, and W is consumed as internal strain
σn = na · σ1 (4)
energy U. This internal energy can be calculated using Eq. (8) as the
0.657
a = −5.41ε (5) sum of the strain energy of each layer for each element where N is
 a the number of elements, Ak is the area of the element number k, L is
n+1
σn+1 = σn · . (6) the number of layers in a corresponding element, tj is the thickness
n of layer j, and {εj } and {σj } are the strain and stress vectors of layer
In Fig. 5, the stress at point a corresponds to σ1 and the stress at j, respectively.
point e corresponds to σn+1 (σ2 in this case) obtained from Eq. (6). M Z
Moreover, cases in which the increment in the strain starts from
X
W = Pi · dδi (7)
point e and it reaches the envelope curve, the stress is to be reset i=1
as n = 1. !
N L Z
As for the shear stiffness of elements after cracking, the X X T 
dεj · σj Ak .

equation regarding the shear transmitting stiffness on the crack U = tj · (8)
k=1 j =1
surface proposed by Yamada et al. [24] is used (see Fig. 6). The
value 3.53 to calculate Gs is also shown in the paper based on their The consumed energy of the concrete and rebar (Uc and Us ) can
experiments. be calculated by applying Eq. (9) to the concrete and rebar layers
1002 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009

Table 1
Re-bar arrangement for single surface of shear wall for test specimens. (All re-bars
are arranged for both surface of the wall.)
Specimen Vertical direction Transversal direction

C-1 D6a @ 9 (degree)b D6 @178 (mm)

C-2 D6 @ 4.5 (degree)b D6 @89 (mm)
I-1 D10 @82 (mm) D10 @82 (mm)
I-2 D10 @61 (mm) D10 @61 (mm)
a
D6 means the deformed bar whose equivalent diameter is 6 mm.
b
The angle at the circumference.

(Lc and Ls ) of the layered shell element, where U = Uc + Us .

Furthermore, in the case of the increment value of δi being 1δi , the
increment value of the concrete and that of the rebar in the bearing
load (1Pci and 1Psi ) at each loading stage can be obtained by
Eq. (10). As a result, the load–displacement relationship, in which
the composite shell element is divided into the concrete and the
rebar, can be illustrated.
!
N Lc Z
X X T 
dεj · σj Ak 
 
Uc = tj ·



k =1 j=1
N Ls Z ! (9)
X X  T 
dεj · σj Ak 

Us = tj ·



k=1 j =1

1U 1UC 1US
1Pi = , 1PC i = , 1PS i = . (10)
1δi 1δi 1δi

3. Outline of tests subjected to studies

Investigations related to the static cyclic loading tests for

cylindrical shear walls and I-shaped shear walls [25] are carried
out.
With regard to the former, two specimens C25-A2-12 and
C25-A2-24 (hereafter, C-1 and C-2), which were obtained from
the horizontal loading test for the cylindrical shear walls shown
in reference [26], are subjected to the investigation. Their
reinforcement ratios are different from each other.
As for the latter, two specimens 36-M8-30 and 48-H8-30
(hereafter, I-1 and I-2) are investigated. They were obtained from a
series of tests shown in reference [27]. Their concrete compressive
strengths are similar, but the reinforcement ratios are different.
Figs. 8 and 9 illustrate the shape of each specimen. In C-1
and C-2, the displacement for calculating the rotational angle was
measured at the position on the ±90◦ direction web surface and
50 mm below the lower end of the loading slab. In I-1 and I-2, it was
measured on the center of the loading direction and at the lower
end of the loading slab. These positions are shown in Figs. 8 and 9.
Table 1 shows the reinforcement pattern of each specimen. Table 2
lists material characteristics, the scale of the tests, and an outline
of the test results. The loading patterns of the test are shown in
Fig. 10(a) and (d). The reinforcement ratios of these specimens are
high because the specimens are modeled as parts of nuclear power
facilities.
3.1. Failure behavior of cylindrical specimen
This test was conducted to estimate the effects of the concrete
strength and the reinforcement ratio upon its load–displacement
relationship of the cylindrical RC shear wall. The scale of specimens
was 1/38 for shear walls of a real nuclear power building. The
reinforcement ratio was determined so that the specimen can
show shear failure.
Regarding specimen C-1, bending cracks occurred on the flange
surface (the surface where the center directions are 0◦ or 180◦ in
Fig. 8) of the cylindrical wall near R = 0.1 × 10−3 for the rotational
Fig. 8. Test specimen’s shape for cylindrical shear walls (C-1, C-2).
angle. In the vicinity of R = 0.3 × 10−3 , shear cracks occurred
on the web surface (the surface where the center directions are
±90◦ in Fig. 8) of the cylindrical wall. In the case of R = 2 × 10−3 ,
the transverse rebars at the center of the web and the vertical
rebars at the bottom of the flange on the tensile side yielded
almost simultaneously. Then, with an increase in the rotational
angle, the number of yielding points increased. After that, the
test specimen showed high deformability. The compression failure
of concrete at the bottom on the compressive side of the flange
surface was not discernible. In the vicinity of R = 40 × 10−3 ,
the central part of the web surface of the cylindrical wall swelled
conspicuously toward the outside and the specimen reached shear
failure.
Test specimen C-2 behaved in almost the same manner as
C-1. However, at the end of the test, compression failure of concrete
began to occur in the area at almost ±60◦ from the compressive
edge center in the direction of 180◦ , as shown in Fig. 8. The
compression failure spread horizontally toward the compressive
edge, and the specimen completely collapsed at R = 17 × 10−3 .
3.2. Failure behavior of I-shaped specimen
As for test specimen I-1, diagonal cracks at the area peripheral
to the web wall as well as bending cracks at the bottom of the
flange wall occurred in the proximity of R = 0.3 × 10−3 . Near
R = 0.7 × 10−3 , shear cracks occurred at the lower part of the web
wall, and the stiffness of the specimen decreased slightly. Then,
as the displacement amplitude increased, the number of cracks
 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009 1003

(a) Elevation. (b) Plan.

Fig. 9. Test specimen’s shape for I-shaped shear walls (I-1, I-2).

(a) Loading pattern for specimens C-1, C-2. (b) Specimen C-1.

(c) Specimen C-2. (d) I Loading pattern for specimens I-1, I-2.

(e) Specimen I-1. (f) Specimen I-2.

Fig. 10. Time history of strain energy for entire body and re-bar (Internal strain energies are used for all lines).

Table 2
Material properties and outline of results of test specimens.

Specimen name C-1 C-2 I-1 I-2

Specimen no. C25-A2-12 C25-A2-24 36-M8-30 48-H8-30
Model scale 1/38 1/38 Not defined Not defined
Shear span ratio 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8
Elastic modulus of concrete (N/mm2 ) 2.26 × 104 2.06 × 104 2.36 × 104 3.49 × 104
Compressive strength of concrete (N/mm2 ) 23.0 25.2 39.3 41.8
Reinforcement ratio 1.2%, 0.6% 2.4%, 1.2% 1.16% 1.56%
Elastic modulus of re-bar (N/mm2 ) 2.07 × 105 2.07 × 105 1.93 × 105 1.93 × 105
Yield stress of re-bar (N/mm2 ) 324 324 296 296
Average axial stress (N/mm2 ) 0 0 1.96 1.96
Maximum strength (kN) 414 639 1901 2264
Rotational angle for maximum load (rad) 41 × 10−3 17 × 10−3 10.0 × 10−3 6.0 × 10−3
Failure mode Shear bond Shear compression Shear slip Shear slip
Load for failure (kN) 414 639 1754 2156
Rotational angle for failure (rad) 41 × 10−3 17 × 10−3 12.2 × 10−3 10.0 × 10−3

increased. In the case of R = 2.6 × 10−3 , both the vertical rebars R = 8 × 10−3 . The specimen reached the maximum load near
at the web part and the transverse cracks at the bottom of the R = 10 × 10−3 and ruptured in the shear sliding failure.
flange on the tensile side yielded. Compression failure began to Test specimen I-2 behaved in almost the same manner as I-1.
occur at the bottom on the compressive side of the web wall at The compression failure began to occur at R = 6 × 10−3 and the
1004 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009

(a) Cylindrical shear wall. (b) I-shaped shear wall.

Fig. 11. Analysis model.

Fig. 12. Cracking conditions of specimen C-1 at failure stage. (a) Test web part (on the side of 90◦ ), (b) Analysis web part (on the side of 90◦ ), (c) Test flange web part (on
the side of 0◦ ), (d) Analysis flange web part (on the side of 0◦ ).

specimen reached the maximum load at almost the same time. It
ruptured in the shear sliding failure at R = 8 × 10−3 .
4. Outline of simulation analyses
Simulation analyses are performed for each test and the
accuracy and validity of the analyses are investigated.
Fig. 11 illustrates the analysis model for each specimen. The
loading slab of the cylindrical specimen was made using linear
elements and those of the I-shaped model were made with a rigid
body. In the analyses, the enforced displacement was given to the
loading points at the ends of both specimens.
It was confirmed that each specimen can be analyzed in a range
up to the vicinity of the failure rotational angle. In this paper, in
order that the consumed energy at the failure stage may easily be
compared after loading up to R = 15 × 10−3 for the cylindrical
specimen or up to R = 10 × 10−3 for the I-shaped specimen, the
elastic strain was released by decreasing the loading value to 0 as
the final step for the analyses.
Figs. 12 and 13 compare the cracking conditions of C-1 and
I-1 between the tests and the analyses. Table 3 explains the
marks used in the figures. At both the web and flange parts, the
cracking conditions obtained from the analyses correspond quite
well to the results of the tests. The colored parts indicate the parts
where the strain in a direction perpendicular to the cracks exceeds
Table 3
Marks in figures for cracking condition (Figs. 12 and 13).
Cracking (Closed at the final step)
Cracking (Opened at the final step)
Strain is greater than the steel yielding strain after cracking.
Axial crash after cracking.
Strain perpendicular to the crack is greater than the steel yielding strain.
the yield strain of the rebars. The analysis results of the yield
conditions of the rebars correspond quite well to the test results.
Furthermore, the analysis results of C-2 and I-2, which are nearly
equivalent to those of C-1 and I-1, correspond quite well to the test
results.
Fig. 14 shows the comparison in the load–displacement
relationship of each specimen between the tests and the analyses.
Although slight differences are discernible in the loop of the
I-shaped specimen, the analysis results correspond quite well to
the test results as a whole.
Thus, it can be thought that these analyses could simulate the
tests well. With regard to the relationship between the rotational
angle R and the horizontal displacement δ (mm), R was set as
δ/1150 for the cylindrical specimens and δ/1400 for the I-shaped
specimens.
 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009
(a) Test.
Fig. 13. Cracking conditions of specimen I-1 at failure stage.
(a) Specimen C-1. (b) Specimen C-2.
Fig. 14. Comparison in load–displacement relationship.
5. Study on energy consumption in analyses
5.1. Comparison of strain energy
Fig. 15 shows the comparison in the relationship between
the rotational angle and the strain energy. The external energy
obtained from Eq. (7) is used for the tests and the internal strain
energy computed using Eq. (8) is used for analyses. Fig. 15(a)
and (b) illustrates the analysis results up to the final stage, which
directly correspond to the test results, from R = −10 × 10−3
for the rotational angle through the point where the loading value
decreases to 0.
Overall, the analysis values are almost equivalent to the test
results. However, the former is slightly smaller than the latter.
In particular, some differences for the cylindrical walls (C-1 and
C-2) are seen in Fig. 15(a) and (b), while the load–displacement
analysis results seems to correspond well to the test results shown
in Fig. 14(a) and (b). From these tendencies, it is considered that
the area of the analysis hysteresis loop, which corresponds to the
consumed energy, is almost accurate in the large strain regions, but
it is smaller than that of the test in the small strain regions.
5.2. Consumed energy of rebars and concrete
The time history of strain energy for each specimen was
illustrated in Fig. 10 with the loading pattern. The broken lines
indicate the strain energy absorbed by the rebars, and the
difference between the solid and broken lines implies the strain
energy absorbed by the concrete. These values were calculated
using Eq. (9). The lateral axis in each figure indicates the analysis
step.
As for the cylindrical specimens, most of the input energy is
absorbed by the rebars for both C-1 and C-2. In particular, even in
the stages after the two hundredth analysis step where the energy
1005
(b) Analysis.
(c) Specimen I-1. (d) Specimen I-2.
consumption amount increases, the increment in the energy is
absorbed mainly by the rebars, and the consumption amount of
energy absorbed by concrete does not increase to a high degree. It
is considered that the aforementioned characteristics are related
to the high ductility and the failure mode led by the yielding of the
rebars of the specimens.
On the other hand, almost all the energy input to the I-shaped
specimen is absorbed by the concrete from the earlier stage, and
the quantity absorbed by the rebars decreases. It is considered that
this phenomenon corresponds to the low ductility and the failure
mode led by the crushing of the concrete of the specimens.
Moreover, the reinforcement ratio of specimen C-2 is two times
that of specimen C-1. The reinforcement ratio of specimen I-2 is
34% greater than that of specimen I-1, and the elasticity modulus of
the concrete is large. In the analyses, both the maximum strength
and total consumed energy for C-2 and I-2 increase more than
those for C-1 and I-1. The rates of increase in the strength and
energy are almost similar. Furthermore, the distribution rates of
the consumed energy for the rebars and concrete are therefore the
same.
As can be considered from the characteristics shown in Fig. 5,
the amount of energy absorbed by the tensile side of the concrete
is small for all the specimens. In these analyses, the amount of
energy absorbed by the shear stiffness shown in Fig. 6 on the
cracking surface was also small. As a result, most of the energy was
consumed due to the compression side on the cracking surface.
Fig. 16 shows the load–displacement relationship obtained
from the allotted loads of the rebars and the concrete, which
have been computed using Eq. (10). In particular, the hysteresis
characteristics of the rebars and the concrete for test specimen
C-1 are clearly presented. Moreover, in the proximity of the area
where the concrete displacement reaches the peak, a part in which
the load–displacement relationship reverses can be seen. It is
considered that this is due to the effects of a rapid variation in the
load allotment of the rebars and the concrete.
1006 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009

(a) Specimen C-1. (b) Specimen C-2. (c) Specimen I-1. (d) Specimen I-2.

Fig. 15. Comparison in rotational angle of member–energy relationship (External energy is used for Test, internal strain energy is used for Analysis).

(a) Specimen C-1. (b) Specimen C-2. (c) Specimen I-1. (d) Specimen I-2.

(e) Specimen C-1. (f) Specimen C-2. (g) Specimen I-1. (h) Specimen I-2.

Fig. 16. Separation of load–displacement relationship.

(a) Specimen C-1. (b) Specimen C-2. (c) Specimen I-1. (d) Specimen I-2.

Fig. 17. Vertical distribution of final consumed energy.

5.3. Distribution of consumed energy
Fig. 17 shows the vertical distribution of the consumed energy
in the final step. It is observed that the amount of consumed
energy in the rebars for all of the specimens is small at their upper
parts and is large near their lower parts. It is considered that this
is caused mainly by the effects of the bending moment. On the
contrary, the consumed energy in the concrete shows a relatively
uniform distribution in a vertical direction. This distribution is
considered to correspond to the shear distribution.
 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009
(a) Consumed energy distribution of entire body.
(c) Consumed energy distribution of concrete.
Fig. 18. Consumed energy distribution of cylindrical test specimen (web surface).
The amount of consumed energy at the lowest parts of the
cylindrical specimen is the maximum, but the amount in the
parts second from the lowest of the I-shaped test specimen is the
maximum. It is considered that this is because the flange wall
restrains the side-bottom of the web wall, and the failure occurred
at the slightly higher position for the I-shaped specimen.
Figs. 18 and 19 show the contour with regard to the consumed
energy of the cylindrical specimens and the I-shaped specimens,
respectively. The consumed energy is shown as the amount per
unit volume of the RC, and the total consumed energy, i.e., the
consumed energy of the rebars and the consumed energy of the
concrete, are compared to each other. The consumed energy of the
rebars concentrating to the flange part corresponds to the bending
failure mode. A tendency, in which the consumed energy of the
concrete that is generated at the web part corresponds to the shear
failure mode, can be seen.
For the cylindrical specimens, the energy of the concrete
concentrates in the lower part of the web center. However, the
degree of energy concentration is fairly small and the energy
expands widely over the entire web part. This corresponds to the
damage conditions illustrated in Fig. 12. It can be considered that
this relatively uniform energy distribution is related to the high
ductility of the cylindrical test specimen.
On the contrary, the energy in the concrete for the I-shaped
specimen concentrates in the small area at the side-bottom of the
web where the compression failure occurs. This corresponds to the
damage conditions shown in Fig. 13.
5.4. Relationship between consumed energy and damage condition
From above results, Table 4 summarized the relationship
between the consumed energy and the damage condition.
1007
(b) Consumed energy distribution of re-bar.
Interesting correspondences can be seen between them while the
studied cases were limited.
In RC nonlinear analyses, the damage conditions are estimated
generally using figures of concrete cracks, rebar yielding condi-
tions, etc. The condition of the consumed energy is thought to be
effective as a means to make a survey of the total damage condi-
tions. Moreover, more appropriate design of shear walls might be
possible by studying and controlling the consumed energy condi-
tion.
6. Conclusions
In this paper, in order to estimate the damage to RC shear
walls using the consumed energy simulation analyses of the cyclic
loading tests were performed. In the simulation analyses, the
distribution of consumed energy at each part of the specimen as
well as the allotment of rebars and concrete was investigated.
Furthermore, the progress of the energy consumption in the
specimen was analyzed. As a result, the following points were
deduced:
(1) The analyses satisfactorily simulate the tests and the validity
of the analysis method was confirmed.
(2) The allotment of the consumed energy to rebars and concrete
was calculated. The allotment of the load–displacement
relationship was also calculated. Concerning the studied
specimens, it was shown that the effects of the rebars were
greater for the cylindrical walls (C-1 and C-2) and the effects of
the concrete were greater for the I-shaped walls (I-1 and I-2)
from these calculations. However, these tendencies were not
confirmed because the studied cases were limited.
(3) A tendency in which the consumed energy distribution of
rebars is connected with the bending failure and the consumed
1008 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009
(a) Consumed energy distribution of entire body.
(c) Consumed energy distribution of concrete.
Fig. 19. Consumed energy distribution of I-shaped test specimen.
Table 4
Summaries of results.
Shape of shear wall Energy consumed mainly in: Failure mode
Cylindrical Rebars Bending
I-shaped Concrete Shear
energy distribution of concrete is connected with the shear
failure was discernible.
(4) The concentration degree of energy of concrete for the
cylindrical specimen is smaller than that for the I-shaped test
specimen. The energy of concrete for the cylindrical specimen
tends to distribute over the entire surface of the web. It is
thought that this is related to high ductility.
(5) It was confirmed from the above that the consumed energy is
effective as an index for estimating the damage to RC shear
walls. Moreover, it can be said that contour figures are useful
as a means to easily understand the analysis results.
Acknowledgments
In this study, some parts of the ‘‘Research on Rationalization of
Nuclear Power Plant Facilities trough Adoption of High-Strength
Reinforcing Bars,’’ which was carried out under the sponsorship of
ten Japanese electric companies, were used. The authors would like
to express their thanks to all the persons involved.
References
[1] Ngo D, Scordelis AC. Finite element analysis of reinforced concrete beams. J
Amer Concr Institute 1967;64:152–63.
[2] ASCE. Finite element analysis of reinforced concrete structures II. In:
Proceedings of the international workshop held in New York City. 1991.
[3] ASCE. Modeling of inelastic behavior of RC structure under seismic load. In:
Proc., Publ. no. 0-7844-0553-0. 2001.
[4] Nuclear power engineering corporation of Japan (NUPEC), Comparison report.
Seismic shear wall, ISP. Nupec’s seismic ultimate dynamic response test.
Rep. no. NUSSWISP-D014. Organization for economic co-operation and
development. Paris. 1996.
(b) Consumed energy distribution of re-bar.
Concentration of consumed energy in concrete Ductility
Small High
Large Low
[5] Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique: CAMUS international benchmark—
Experimental results synthesis of the participants’ report. CEA and GEO,
a French research network, part of the CAMUS working group under the
auspices of the french association of earthquake engineering (AFPS). 1998.
[6] Maekawa K, Pimanmas A, Okamura H. Nonlinear mechanics of reinforced
concrete. London: Spon Press; 2003.
[7] Kwak HG, Kim DY. Material nonlinear analysis of RC shear walls subject to
cyclic loadings. Eng Struct 2004;26(10):1423–36.
[8] Palemo D, Vecchio FJ. Simulation of cyclically loaded concrete structures based
on the finete-element method. J Struct Eng 2007;133(5):728–38.
[9] Belmouden Y, Lestuzzi P. Analytical model for predicting nonlinear reversed
cyclic behaviour of reinforced concrete structural walls. Eng Struct 2007;
29(7):1263–76.
[10] Murakami Y, Kasuga Y, Tsunashima N, Nakano T, Onimaru S, Nakamura N,
Tachibana E. Analytical study on seismic damage estimation of PWR-type
nuclear reactor building by nonlinear FEM model. In: International conference
on advances and new challenge in earthquake engineering research. 2002.
[11] Yabushita N, Nakamura N, Suzuki T, Yamada J, Tsunashima N, Nakano T.
Analyses of reactor building by 3D nonlinear FEM models considering basemat
uplift for simultaneous horizontal and vertical ground motions. In: Proc. of
19th international conference on structural mechanics in reactor technology.
2007. Paper no. K10-4.
[12] Uomoto T, Yajima T, Hongou K. Damage evaluation of reinforced concrete
beams subjected to cyclic bending moment using dissipated energy. J JSCE
1993;(460/V-18):85–91 [in Japanese].
[13] Benavent-Climent A, Akiyama H, López-Almansa F, Pujades LG. Prediction of
ultimate earthquake resistance of gravity-load designed RC buildings. Eng
Struct 2004;26(8):1103–13.
[14] Park YJ, Ang AHS. Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete.
J Struct Eng ASCE 1985;111(4):722–39.
[15] Mukai T, Hata H, Nomura S. Damage evaluation and proposal of equation to
calculate dissipated energy at safety limit state for RC beam with flexural
yielding under earthquakes. J Struct Constr Eng, AIJ 2007;(617):145–51 [in
Japanese].
[16] Yousuke Murakami, Naohiko Tsunashima, Masahiko Ozaki. et al. Nonlinear
earthquake response analysis of PWR reactor building for simultaneous
horizontal and vertical ground motions. In: Proc. of 16th international
conference on structural mechanics in reactor technology. 2001. Paper no.
1130.
 N. Nakamura et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 999–1009
[17] Yabana S, Kanazawa K, Ohmiya Y, Taniguchi H, Kambayashi A. Shaking table
tests of earthquake resisting walls. In: Proc. of 11th world conference on
earthquake engineering. 1996.
[18] Ueda M, Seya H, et al. Nonlinear analysis on RC shear wall shaking table test.
SMiRT14, vol 5. Div. H. 1997. p. 433–40.
[19] Fafitis A, Shar SP. Lateral reinforcement for high-strength concrete columns.
ACI special publication. No. SP-87. 1985; p. 213–32.
[20] Stevens ID, Uzumeri SM, Collins MP. Analytical modeling of concrete subjected
to monotonic and reversed loadings. Department of Civil Engineering.
Publication no. 87-1. Univercity of Toronto; 1987.
[21] Naganuma K. Nonlinear analytical model for reinforced concrete panels
under in-plane stresses : Study on nonlinear analytical method for reinforced
concrete wall structures (Part 1). J Struct Constr Eng, AIJ 1991;(421):39–48 [in
Japanese].
[22] Karsan ID, Jirsa JO. Behavior of Concrete under Compressive Loading. J Struct
Div, ASCE 1969;2543–63.
1009
[23] Yamada M, Kawamura H, Morisita H. A Study on plastic fatigue of concrete.
Summaries of technical papers in Kinki Area. Architectural Institute of Japan.
1977. p. 21–24 [in Japanese].
[24] Yamada K, Aoyagi M. Shear transfer across crack. In: Proc. of JCI 2nd colloquium
on shear analysis of RC structures. 1983. p. 19–28 [in Japanese].
[25] Nakamura N, Kasuga Y, Tsunashima N, Ozaki M, Nakano T, et al. Analytical
study on energy consumption of reinforced concrete shear wall subjected
to cyclic horizontal loading. J Struct Constr Eng, AIJ 2003;(565):87–94 [in
Japanese].
[26] Setogawa S. Tests of reinforced concrete cylindrical shell subjected to
repeatedly horizontal force. J Struct Constr Eng, AIJ 1980;(290):57–67 [in
Japanese].
[27] Kanechika M, Kobayashi A, Kato M, Sakanishi M, Suzuki N. et al. Application of
high strength rebar for RC shear wall part-1–7. Summaries of technical papers
of annual meeting of AIJ. Structures II. 1989. p. 567–80 [in Japanese].