An Analytical Model for High-rise Wall-frame Building Structures

Minsik Bang1, Jaehong Lee2

Department of Architectural Engineering, Sejong University, Seoul 143-747, Republic of Korea

1
Graduate Student
2
Associate Professor

Abstract
In this paper, the governing equations of a wall-frame building are formulated through the continuum
approach and the whole structure is idealized as a shear–flexural cantilever. The effect of shear deformation
of the wall and flexural deformation of the frame are considered and incorporated in the formulation of the
governing equations. A displacement-based one-dimensional finite element model is developed to predict
lateral drift of wall-frame structures under horizontal loads. Numerical results are obtained and compared
with previously available results and the values obtained from the finite element package MIDAS. The study
indicates that the effect of shear deformation of the wall as well as the flexural deformation of the frame
should be considered especially for tall and/or slender buildings. The proposed method is found to be simple
and efficient, provides reasonably accurate results in early design stage of tall building structures.

Keywords: wall-frame structures, analytical model, shear-deformable beam, shear deformation, flexural deformation

1. Introduction the quality of the chosen model and method of

A tall building comprising frames and shear walls
properly coupled together is one of the most efficient
and economical structural systems. In this system, the
shear walls are often parts of the elevator and service
cores while the frames are arranged in plan, and they
are linked by floor slabs such that the building will
deflect as a structure with rigid section.
When a wall-frame structure is loaded laterally, the
wall deflects in a flexural mode with concavity
downward and a maximum slope at the top, and the
frame deflects in a shear mode with concavity upward
and a maximum slope at the base. Accordingly, the
deflected shape of the whole structure has a flexural
profile in the lower part and a shear profile in the
upper part (Fig.1). The interacting forces cause the
wall to restrain the frame near the base and the frames
to support the wall at the top, and thus, reduce the
lateral drift of the structure. The major advantages of a
wall-frame structure depend on the amount of
horizontal interaction, which is governed by the
relative stiffness of the walls and frames, and the
height of the structure.
Tall buildings are usually so complicated that even
an elaborate computational model is a considerable
simplification, and the results from an analysis will
always be approximate, being at best only as good as
2
Corresponding Author: Jaehong Lee, Associate Professor
Department of Architectural Engineering, Sejong University,
98 Gunja-Dong, Gwangjin-Gu, Seoul, 143-747, Republic of
Korea.
Tel: (82-2)3408-3287 Fax: (82-2)3408-3331
E-mail: jhlee@sejong.ac.kr
analysis. In this reason, many simplified analysis
techniques have been developed for the analysis of
wall-frame structures in the past decades. Rosenblueth
and Holtz 1) are maybe the first researchers to study
the behavior of wall-frame structures. Khan and
Sbarounis 2) investigated the interaction of frames and
shear walls.
Heidebrecht and Smith 3) proposed analytical model
for wall-frame structures. They considered the frame
and the spandrel beams as shear continua and solved
the whole structure as a shear–flexural cantilever.
Smith et al. 4) presented a generalized technique to
calculate the lateral drift of braced frame, rigid frame
and coupled shear wall. Balendra et al. 5) investigated
the free vibration behavior of wall-frame buildings
using the shear continua model. Swaddiwudhipong
and his collaborators employed the continuum model
to study the behavior of core–frame interaction in tall
buildings 6). Recently, they also investigated the
effects of axial deformation on vibration
characteristics of tall buildings 7,8). Smith and Coull
presented continuum-based analytical models for
various kinds of structural systems 9). Most studies up
to now have concentrated on analyzing the interaction
of the frame and shear wall neglecting the shear
deformation of the shear wall and flexural
deformation of the frame. However, the effects of
shear deformation of the wall or flexural deformation
of the frame can sometimes cause significant results.
The present research focuses on deriving the
governing equations for the wall-frame building under
lateral loads based on the continuum approach, in
which the whole structure is idealized as a shear–

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 1003

flexural cantilever. Both the effects of shear
deformation of the shear wall and flexural defor-
mation of the frame are considered and incorporated
in the formulation of the governing equations. The
finite element method is developed to formulate the
problem.

Fig. 2. Deformed configuration of wall-frame systems.

Similarly, the linear strain of the frame can also be

given as:
wall frame wall-frme
w\ f ww
H xf z J xf \ f (2b)
Fig. 1. Fundamental concept for wall-frame structural systems. wx wx

The strain energy of the shear wall and the frame

2. Basic assumptions are given, respectively, by
In deriving the governing equations of the present
approach, following assumptions have been made: 1
Uw (V xwH xw V xzw J xzw ) dv
2 ³v
(3a)
1. The materials are elastic and homogeneous.
1
2. The wall-frame structures do not twist, and Uf (V xf H xf  V xzf J xzf ) dv
2 ³v
(3b)
thus, can be analyzed as equivalent planar
model.
3. The wall and the frame are modeled as shear The total strain energy of the wall-frame structure
deformable beams, respectively, and they are can now be given by adding the energy for the wall
connected by rigid bar. Therefore, the and the frame as
deflections of the wall and the frame are
identical while the deflection slopes are 1 L w w\ w ww w\ f ww
Ut  Qxzw ( \ w )  M xf  Qxzf ( \ f )]dx
2 ³0
different. [M x
wx wx wx wx
(4)

3. Governing equations
According to the assumption 3, the displacement Where M xw , Qxzw are bending moment and shear force
field for wall and the frame can be expressed as shear- in the wall, and M xf , Qxzf are bending moment and
deformable beam model, respectively. shear force in the frame. These stress resultants are
respectively defined by integrating the cross sectional
Ww w area:
Uw z\ w (1a)
f f
U z\ f W w (1b) M xw EI w\ 'w (5a)
w
Q xz GAw ( w ' \ 'w ) (5b)
where \ w and \ f denote rotations of a transverse
normal of shear wall and frame, respectively, and w‫ٻ‬ M xf EI f\ ' f (5c)
f
denote transverse displacement of shear wall and Q xz GA f ( w ' \ ' f ) (5d)
frame (Fig.2).
From the theory of elasticity, the linear strain of the
In Eq.(5), EI w and EI f are effective flexural
shear wall can be given by using the above assumed
rigidities of the shear wall and the frame, and GAw
displacements as follows:
and GAf are effective shear rigidities of the shear
wall and the frame, respectively. While all the
w\ w ww effective rigidities can be computed directly from the
H xw z J xw \ w (2a)
wx wx material and sectional properties of the structure, the

1004 CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

effective shear rigidity of the frame, GAf can be element as a linear combination of the one-
calculated by using the expression (6). dimensional Lagrange interpolation function I j
associated with node j and the nodal values:
12 E f
GAf (6)
1 1 n n n
h(  )
G C w ¦W I
j 1
j j , \w ¦<
j 1
Ij , \ f
wj ¦<
j 1
Ij ,
fj (11)

where E f is elastic modulus of the frame and h is a Substituting these expressions into the weak statement
story height. G and C are stiffness of the girder and in Eq.(8), the finite element model of a typical
column, respectively. element can be expressed as
The variation of the strain energy is stated as:
§ K11 K12 K13 · ­ W ½ ­ f1 ½
GU
1 L
[ EI w\ 'w G\ 'w  GAw ( w '\ w )(G w ' G\ 'w ) ¨ ¸° ° ° °
2 ³0 (7a) ¨ K 22 K 23 ¸ ® < w ¾ ®0¾ (12)
 EI f\ ' f G\ ' f  GAf ( w ' \ f )(G w ' G\ ' f )]dx ¨ sym.
© K 33 ¸¹ °¯ < f °¿ ° °
¯0¿

The variation of the work done by the transverse force where  K  is the element stiffness matrix given by
q can be written
l
K ij11 ³ [GA I 'I '  GA I 'I ']dx
w i j f i j (13a)
L 0
GV  ³ qG wdx (7b) l
0 K ij12 ³ GA I 'I dx w i j (13b)
0
l
13
Using the principle of total potential energy, the K ij ³ GA I 'I dx
0 f i j (13c)
following weak statement is obtained: l
K ij22 ³ [ EI I 'I '  GA I I ]dx
w i j w i j (13d)
0

0 G3 GU  GV (8) K 23
ij 0 (13e)
l
K ij33 ³ [ EI I 'I f i j '  GAf IiI j ]dz (13f)
The governing equations of the present approach 0

can now be derived by integrating the derivatives of

varied quantities by parts. In Eq.(12), { f1 } is the force vector given by

( EI w\ 'w )' GAw (w'\ w ) 0 (9a) l

f i1 ³ qI dx i (14)
( EI f\ ' f )' GAf ( w ' \ f ) 0 (9b) 0

[GAw ( w ' \ w )]' [GAf ( w ' \ f )]' q 0 (9c)

5. Numerical results and discussion
The natural boundary conditions are of the form:
5.1 Central core system
In order to verify the accuracy and efficiency of the
\w : Mw (10a)
present analytical model, the example problem by
\ f :Mf (10b) Smith 9) is analyzed (Fig.3), and the results by present
w : Q f  Qw (10c) approach are compared with the previous result 9) and
the finite element package MIDAS 10).
It is noted that the governing equations are rather a
combination of two shear-deformable beams sharing Y X X X X Y
the deflection w and having the deflection slope \ w
and \ f , respectively. Since these three dependent
variables are fully coupled, the equations can not be
easily solved manually. Accordingly, a numerical
technique such as finite element method should be
employed.

4. Finite element model

The present theory for wall-frame structures
described in the previous section was implemented via nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
a displacement based finite element method. The
Fig. 3. Plan of 35-story single core wall-frame structure.
generalized displacements are expressed over each

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 1005

 Table 1. Second moment inertia of each frame. part of the structures. The result with “shear
Interior Exterior Girder considered” shows slightly better agreement with
MIDAS solution than the Smith result. The result with
Column Column
both shear and bending considered shows excellent
Frame Type1 0.083 m4 0.050 m4 0.011 m4 agreement with MIDAS solution indicating that the
Frame Type2 0.050 m 4
0.034 m 4
0.005 m4 flexural deformation of the frame plays an important
role in deflection of the building structure.
Table 2. Flexural and shear rigidities of the structure. ΋ ͠͹
Rigidity Value ͢͟͡

Shear rigidity of the walls (GA ) w 30.466 u 10 7 kN

ͪ͟͡
Flexural rigidity of the walls ( EI ) w 6.26 u 109 kNm 2
Shear rigidity of the frames (G A ) f 14.04 u 10 5 kN ͩ͟͡

Flexural rigidity of the frames ( EI ) f 2.53 u 1010 kNm 2

ͨ͟͡

The plan of the building structure in Fig.3 is of a ͧ͟͡

35-story, 122.5m high, wall-frame structure. The

structure is assumed to be under wind loading of ͦ͟͡

1.5kN / m 2 . The elastic modulus and the Poisson’s ratio

ͥ͟͡
are assumed to be E 2.0 u 107 kN / m 2 and Q 0.17 ,
respectively. The moments of inertia for the frames
ͤ͟͡
are given in Table 1. The flexural and shear rigidities
΄ΞΚΥΙΌͪΎ
of the wall and the frame are given in Table 2. ͣ͟͡
In MIDAS 10), all the beams and columns as well as ΄ΙΖΒΣ͑ΔΠΟΤΚΕΖΣΖΕ

the core wall are modeled in detail, and thus, MIDAS ͟͢͡
΄ΙΖΒΣ͜ΓΖΟΕΚΟΘ͑ΔΠΟΤΚΕΖΣΖΕ
model can be considered to be accurate (Fig.4). ;ͺ͵Ͳ΄
͟͡͡
͟͡͡͡ ͦ͟͡͡ ͟͢͡͡ ͦ͟͢͡ ͣ͟͡͡ ͣͦ͟͡
͵ΖΗΝΖΔΥΚΠΟ͙͑Ξ͚

Fig. 5. Lateral deflection of the single core structure with

height of 122.5m under uniformly-distributed wind load.

As a next example, a building structure with

reinforced-concrete wall core and steel frame of
height 180m and of 45-story under wind load of
1.5kN / m 2 is considered as shown in Fig.6. The
moments of inertia for the frames are given in Table 3.
The elastic modulus of the wall and the frame are
Ew 2.5 u 107 kN / m 2 , E f 2.0 u 108 kN / m 2 , respectively.
The flexural and shear rigidities of the wall and the
frame are given in Table 4.
Fig. 4. Three-dimensional MIDAS model.
Y X X X X X X Y

The lateral drift of the structure based on the

present approach is compared with the previous result
by Smith model 9) and MIDAS 10) in Fig.5. In
computing the result for “shear considered”, the shear
deformation of both the wall and the frame are
included in the analysis, but the flexural deformation
of the frame is neglected. In computing the result for
“shear+bending considered”, all the effects including
the flexural deformation of the frame are considered.
As can been seen in Fig.5, the result by Smith nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
underestimates the deflection especially for the upper Fig. 6. Plan of 45-story single core wall-frame structure.

1006 CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

 Table 3. Second moment inertia of each frame. shows excellent agreement with MIDAS solution.
Interior Exterior Girder
5.2 Double core system
Column Column
This example presents double core structure (Fig.8).
Frame Type1 0.083 m4 0.050 m4 0.011 m4 Respectively, the height of the structure is assumed to
Frame Type2 0.050 m 4
0.034 m 4
0.005 m4 be 160m (40-story) and 228m (57-story), and load is
assumed to be under wind loading of 2kN / m 2 .
Table 4. Flexural and shear rigidities of the structure.
Y X X X Y
Rigidity Value
Shear rigidity of the walls (GA) w 3.526 u 108 kN
Flexural rigidity of the walls ( EI ) w 34.07 u 109 kNm 2
Shear rigidity of the frames (G A ) f 2.149 u 10 7 kN

Flexural rigidity of the frames (EI ) f 8 u 1 0 11 kN m 2

The lateral drift of the structure based on the

present approach is compared with the previous result
by Smith 9) and MIDAS solution in Fig.7. The result
by Smith model underestimates the deflection, and the Fig. 8. Plan of double core wall-frame structure.
discrepancy becomes significant for the top of the
structure. The result with “shear considered” agrees Table 5. Flexural and shear rigidities of the structure.
well with that of MIDAS for the lower part of the Rigidity Value
structure. That is, by including the shear deformation Shear rigidity of the walls (GA) w 3.632 u 108 kN
of the wall, which restrains the frame near the base,
Flexural rigidity of the walls ( EI ) w 10.3 u 109 kNm 2
the lateral deflection shows good agreement with
MIDAS solution. Shear rigidity of the frames (GA) f 8.179 u 106 kN

Flexural rigidity of the frames ( EI ) f 3 u 1011 kNm 2

΋ ͠͹
͢͟͡
Elastic modulus of the frame and the shear wall,
ͪ͟͡ and the second moment inertia in each frame are the
same as the ones in the previous example. The
ͩ͟͡ effective flexural and shear rigidities of the structure
are given in Table 5.
ͨ͟͡
΋ ͠͹
͢͟͡
ͧ͟͡

ͪ͟͡
ͦ͟͡

ͩ͟͡
ͥ͟͡

ͨ͟͡
ͤ͟͡

ͧ͟͡
΄ΞΚΥΙΌͪΎ
ͣ͟͡
΄ΙΖΒΣ͑ΔΠΟΤΚΕΖΣΖΕ
ͦ͟͡
΄ΙΖΒΣ͜ΓΖΟΕΚΟΘ͑ΔΠΟΤΚΕΖΣΖΕ
͟͢͡
;ͺ͵Ͳ΄ ͥ͟͡

͟͡͡
͟͡͡͡ ͣ͟͡͡ ͥ͟͡͡ ͧ͟͡͡ ͩ͟͡͡ ͟͢͡͡ ͤ͟͡
͵ΖΗΝΖΔΥΚΠΟ͙͑Ξ͚ ΄ΞΚΥΙΌͪΎ
ͣ͟͡ ΄ΙΖΒΣ͑ΔΠΟΤΚΕΖΣΖΕ
Fig. 7. Lateral deflection of the single core structure with
΄ΙΖΒΣ͜ΓΖΟΕΚΟΘ͑ΔΠΟΤΚΕΖΣΖΕ
height of 180m under uniformly-distributed wind load. ͟͢͡
;ͺ͵Ͳ΄

For the upper part of the structure, however, the ͟͡͡

͟͡͡͡ ͥ͟͡͡ ͩ͟͡͡ ͣ͟͢͡ ͧ͟͢͡ ͣ͟͡͡
result does not agree well with the MIDAS solution. ͵ΖΗΝΖΔΥΚΠΟ͙͑Ξ͚
That is because the flexural deformation of the frame
which is crucial for the upper part, is not included in Fig. 9. Lateral deflection of the double core structure with
the analysis. The result with both shear and bending height of 160m under uniformly-distributed wind load.

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 1007

 The lateral drift of the structure with the height of
160m is presented in Fig.9. The behavior of the
structure is similar to that of the previous example for
single-core structure. Again, the result with “shear
considered” shows good agreement with MIDAS for
the lower part of the structure, and then the error
increases as for upper part of the structure. The result
with “shear+bending considered” agrees very well
with MIDAS through all the level of the structure. As
shown in Fig.10, for a structure with higher aspect
ratio (height of 228m), the upper part of the structure
is rather not governed by shear mode, but by flexural
and shear mode equally. Accordingly, neglecting the
flexural deformation of the frame can yield significant
error in computing the lateral deflection for top of the
structure up to 40%. The result with “shear+bending
considered” again shows excellent agreement with
MIDAS solution.
΋ ͠͹
͢͟͡
ͪ͟͡
ͩ͟͡
ͨ͟͡
ͧ͟͡
ͦ͟͡
ͥ͟͡
ͤ͟͡
΄ΞΚΥΙΌͪΎ
ͣ͟͡ ΄ΙΖΒΣ͑ΔΠΟΤΚΕΖΣΖΕ
΄ΙΖΒΣ͜ΓΖΟΕΚΟΘ͑ΔΠΟΤΚΕΖΣΖΕ
͟͢͡
;ͺ͵Ͳ΄
͟͡͡
͟͡͡ ͟͢͡ ͣ͟͡ ͤ͟͡ ͥ͟͡
͵ΖΗΝΖΔΥΚΠΟ͙͑Ξ͚
Fig. 10. Lateral deflection of the double core structure with
height of 228m under uniformly-distributed wind load.
6. Concluding remarks
An analytical model was developed to study the
deflection of wall-frame structures. The model is
capable of predicting accurate deflection for various
configuration including core types and aspect ratios
of the structures. To formulate the problem, a one-
dimensional displacement-based finite element
method is employed. Based on the theoretical
developments and numerical results, the following
concluding remarks can be made:
1. The previous conventional model, which neglects
the shear deformation of the wall and the flexural
deformation of the frame, overestimates the shear
1008 CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea
rigidity of the wall and the flexural rigidity of the
frame. Accordingly, the model significantly
underestimates the lateral deflection of the wall-
frame structures.
2. The analytical model, which considers the shear
deformation of the wall and neglects the flexural
deformation of the frame, gives the better results
than the conventional model, yet yields
remarkable discrepancy in lateral deflection with
MIDAS model.
3. The analytical model, which considers both the
shear deformation of the wall and the flexural
deformation of the frame, shows excellent
agreement with MIDAS solution for all the types
of wall-frame structures considered. That is, the
model can give sufficiently accurate results with
considerably less efforts and time.
4. As the aspect ratio of the building structure gets
higher, the upper part of the structure is rather not
governed by shear mode, but by flexural and
shear mode equally. Accordingly, neglecting the
flexural deformation of the frame can yield
significant error in computing the lateral
deflection, and the proposed analytical model
should be employed.
The approximate method of analysis is valuable in
providing a fundamental understanding of the
behavior of a tall building structure and in allowing
the initial sizing of primary members as part of the
preliminary design process. The proposed analytical
model is found to be very accurate and efficient for
the analysis of the behavior of a wall-frame structure.
As a natural extension of this research, a model which
incorporates the twisting deformation or P-'effect
awaits further attention.
ͦ͟͡ 7. Acknowledgement
This research was supported by the Ministry of
Construction & Transportation of Korea and Korea
Institute of Construction, Transportation Technology
Evaluation and Planning through Grant 03R&D
C103A1040001-03A0204-00110. The support is
gratefully acknowledged.
Reference
1) Rosenblueth, E. and Holtz, I. (1960) Elastic Analysis of Shear
Walls in Tall Building. ACI J. 56(12), 1209-1222.
2) Khan, F.R. and Sbarounis, J.A. (1964) Interaction of Shear Walls
and Frames. J. Struct. Div., Proc. ASCE 90, ST3, 285-335.
3) Heidebrecht, A.C. and Stafford Smith, B. (1973) Approximate
Analysis of Tall Wall-Frame Structures. J. Struct Div., Proc.
ASCE 99, ST2, 199-221.
4) Smith BS, Kuster M, Hoenderkamp JCD. (1981) A generalized
approach to the deflection analysis of braced frame, rigid frame
and coupled wall structures. Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, 8(2): 230-240
5) Balendra T, Swaddiwudhipong S, Quek ST, Lee SL. (1984) Free
vibration of asymmetric shear wall-frame buildings. Earthquake
 Engineering and Structural Dynamics 12: 629-650.
6) Swaddiwudhipong S, Piriyakoontorn S, Lim YB, Lee SL. (1989)
Analysis of tall buildings considering the effect of axial
deformation by the Galerkin method. Computers & Structures
32(6): 1362-1369.
7) Swaddiwudhipong S, Lee SL. Zhou, Q. (2001) Effect of axial
deformation on vibration of tall buildings, The structural
design of tall buildings 10: 79-91.
8) Swaddiwudhipong S, Sidji, S, Lee SL. (2002) The effects of axial
deformation and axial force on vibration characteristics of tall
buildings, The structural design of tall buildings 11: 309-328.
9) Smith, BS., and Coull, A., (1991) Tall Building Structure:
Analysis and Design, John Wiley & Sons.
10) MIDAS/GEN. V6.32, Users Manual. 2004, MIDAS Information
Technology Co., Ltd.
CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 1009