PAPER SP36-7

STRENGTH OF HIGH-RISE SHEAR WALLS

- RECTANGULAR CROSS SECTION

BY
ALEX E. CARDENAS
DONALD D. MAGURA
Synopsis: The results of a laboratory investigation on the strength of shear
walls for high-rise buildings are presented. Six large rectangular shear
wall specimens were subjected to static loads representing gravity and wind
or earthquake forces. Variables were the amount and distribution of vertical reinforcement and the effect of the moment to shear ratio.
Results indicate that the flexural strength of rectangular shear walls can be
calculated using the same assumptions as for reinforced concrete beams.
Also, the strength of high-rise shear walls containing minimum horizontal
shear reinforcement is generally controlled by flexure.
Keywords: axial loads; bendinp moments; deformation; ductility; earthquake resistant structures; failure; flexural strength; framinp. systems;
high rise buildings; laterallressure; loads (forces); multistory buildinps;
reinforced concrete; relnforc.np, steels; research; shear proDerties; shear
strength; shear tests; ~ ~
---

119

120
response of multistory
concrete structures
to lateral forces
ACI member Alex E. Cardenas is c.onsulting- oogineer, Lima, Peru. He received his CE degree from the Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria, Lima and
MS and PhD degrees in structural engineering from the University of Illinois.
From 1968 to 1972, Dr. Cardenas was a research engineer with the Portland
Cement Association. Currently he is a member of ACI-ASCE Committee
426, Shear and Diagonal Tension and ACI Committee 442, Lateral Forces.
ACI member Donald D. Magura is senior design engineer, ABAM Engineers
Inc., Tacoma, Wash. He received BS and MS degrees in civil engineering
from the University of Illinois. From 1962 to 1969, Mr. Magura was aresearch engineer with the Portland Cement Association. Currently, he is
chairman of the PCI committee on prestress losses.

HIGHLIGHTS
There is limited information ~egarding the strength of shear walls in buildings. Prior to the publication of ACI 318-71 (1), only the Uniform Building
Code (2) contained design provisions for shear walls. The UBC provisions
were based on shear tests of deep beams (3, 4) with and without web reinforcement.
To develop basic information, the Portland Cement Association initiated a
laboratory investigation of reinforced concrete shear walls in high and lowrise buildings. The main features of the high-rise wall tests are:
1. Tests of six large rectangular shear wall specimens.
2. Consideration of gravity and lateral loads.
3. Distribution of lateral loads to simulate interaction
between frames and shear walls.
Results obtained from these six tests and seven others on low -rise walls*
were used to develop design provisions for shear walls (5), The provisions
are included in Section 11. 16, Special Provisions for Walls, of ACI 318-71.
CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn as a result of this investigation:
1.

The strength of most rectangular reinforced concrete

shear walls in high-rise buildings is governed by
flexure rather than shear.

* Cardenas, A. E., "Strength of Low -Rise :'ltear Walls - Rectangular

Cross Sections, 11 to be published by the Portland Cement Association,
Skokie, Illinois.

121
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections
2.
3.
4.

Design for flexural strength of rectangular shear walls

can be carried out on the basis of Section 10. 2, Assumptions, of ACI 318-71.
Design for shear strength of rectangular shear walls
can be carried out on the basis of Section 11. 16,
Special Provisions for Walls, of ACI 318-71.
The amount and distribution. of vertical reinforcement
in high-rise rectangular shear walls has a definite
influence on
load-deformation and energy absorption characteristics.
BACKGROUND

Concrete walls in high-rise buildings are often used to carry lateral loads
in conjunction with frames or frame-tubes (6, 7). Since they carry the story
shear they are generally called "shear walls." However, this terminology
does not indicate that the carrying capacity of the wall is controlled by its
shear strength.
An investigation of shear wall structures can be subdivided into three parts:
determination of the loads, analysis of the structural response and design
of the structural members.

Basic design information on the nature and magnitude of wind and earthquake loads has been described in detail (2, 6, 8, 9). The analysis of the
response of shear wall structures has also received wide attention. Some
of the papers presenting analytical methods are contained in Ref. (10-14).
Computer programs intended for use in design are also available (15, 16).
Research concerning the behavior and strength of shear walls is scarce. A
number of investigations have been conducted in Japan. However, only
limited information (17 -20) is available in English. In the United States,
the only systematic investigation concerning the strength of shear walls
was carried out by Benjamin and Williams (21-24) at the University of
Stanford. The test program considered only low -rise shear walls surrounded by a reinforced concrete frame and subjected to static loads. A
continuation of this investigation for dynamic loads was carried out by
Antebi, et. al., (25) at MI'r.
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
Shear .walls for high-rise buildings are usually designed to interact with
other structural elements. One of the most common systems found in

122
response of multistory
concrete structures
to latera I forces
practice is that of a frame* interacting with a shear wall.** Figure 1a
shows a frame-shear wall structure subjected to a system of lateral forces
due to wind or earthquake,
Because of the different lateral stiffness characteristics of the frame and
the wall, the frame may tend to pull the wall in the upper stories and push
it forward in the lower stories (11, 12). This interaction causes a distribution of shear forces between the frame and the wall similar to that shown in
Figs. 1b and 1c. Bending moment and shear force diagrams resulting from
these forces acting on the shear wall are shown in Figs. 2a and 2b. The
location of the point of contraflexure in the shear wall depends on many
variables discussed elsewhere (11, 12),
The forces acting on that portion of the shear wall below the point of contraflexure are shown in Fig. 2c. They are: axial stresses, ncf' representing
the effects of dead and live loads; a shear force, Vcf' representing the resultant shear force of the upper stories; and story shears, f, distributed
between the point of contraflexure and the base of the wall.
The laboratory specimen and the load distribution selected for this investigation were intended to simulate the conditions existing in the lower portion
of a high-rise shear wall as shown in Fig. 2c. In addition, the distribution
of shear forces was chosen such that 50 percent of the total shear force, V,
at the base of the wall, was applied at the point of contraflexure, Vcf' The
remaining shear force was equally distributed between the point of contraflexure and the base of the wall.
Ranges for variables such as amounts of vertical and horizontal reinforcement, magnitude of the axial stresses, concrete strength and reinforcement
grade were determined from a survey of high-rise buildings designed and
built in the Chicago area and on the West Coast.
For convenience of testing, the shear wall specimens in the laboratory were
rotated 90 with respect to the vertical position of a shear wall in a building,
In describing the specimen characteristics and test results on this report,
however, .reference is made to the orientation of a shear wall in a building
rather than its position in the laboratory,
Figure 3 shows dimensions and test setup for four of the six specimens
tested. The depth of the wall was tw =6ft. 3 in. (1. 91 m) and the thickness,
h = 3 in. (7. 5 em). The height of the specimen, representing the portion of
the wall between the base and rx>int of contraflexure, was ~ = 21 ft. (6. 40 m),

* Acontributing
frame, as defined here, includes all beams,
to lateral stiffness.

spandrels and floor systems

** A shear wall comprises one wall or a combination of shear walls extending

ove.r all or part of the height of the structure.

123
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections
Two other specimens having the same cross sectional dimensions, but with
a height of 12 ft. (3, 66 m) were also tested.
The part of the specimen labeled "restrained area" in Fig. 3 was intended to
represent the restraint condition at the base of the wall. In the design of the
test rig and loading equipment, particular care was taken to provide a fixed
end condition at the base of the wall. In addition, instrumentation was provided to measure base rotations due to elastic deformations of the restrained
area and the loading equipment.
Figure 4 shows the test rig used for the specimens with a height~ = 21ft.
(6. 40 m), The loading rods going through the laboratory test floor apply the
lateral forces to the wall specimen. Post-tensioning rods shown longitudinally in the figure, apply the gravity loads. The vertical steel tubes attached
to each side of the wall were used to simulate lateral restraint and prevent
large lateral deflections. A more detailed explanation of materials, instrumentation and test procedures used is given in Appendix A.
TEST RESUt.TS
Specimen Characteristics
Dimensions and material properties for the six high-rise shear wall specimens tested are listed in Table 1. All specimens had the same rectangular
cross section, 3 in. by 75 in. (7. 5 em by 190 em).
Specimens SW-1, frvv-2, and SW-3 had the same height, ~=21ft. (6.40 m).
Their corresponding moment to shear ratio calculated at a distance tw/2
from the base of the wall was M/V = 2. 0 tw. The only variable was the
amount of uniformly distributed vertical or flexural reinforcement which
ranged between 0. 27 and 3. 0 percent.
Specimens 'i:NJ-4 and SW-5 had a height of~ = 12ft. (3. 66 m). The corresponding moment to shear ratio was M/V = 1, 0 tw. Both specimens were
designed for the same flexural strength but containing different distributions
of flexural reinforcement. Fig. 5 shows the two distributions of flexural
reinforcement used. Specimen SW -4 had uniformly Qistributed reinforcement, while SW -5 had concentrated reinforcement.
Specimen SW -6 was similar to SW -3 except for the distribution of flexural .
reinforcement. In SW -6, the bars were concentrated near the ends in the
same manner as for SW-5.
Shear or horizontal reinforcement was constant for all six specimens at
0. 0027 times the concrete gross area. All reinforcement used met requirements of ASTM Designation: A-615-68, Grade 60 (4200 kgf/cm 2 ). The

124
response of multistory
concrete structures
to lateral forces

nominal concrete compressive strength was 6000 psi (420 kgf/cm 2 ) while the
axial compressive stress in all specimens was nominal 420 psi (29 kgf/cm 2 ).
Table 2 summarizes the test results for all six specimens. The mode of
failure for each specimen is also listed.
Load-Deformation Relationships
Moment-curvature or load-deflection relationships of shear walls are significantly influenced by the amount and distribution of vertical reinforcement
and the presence of axial load. Fig. 6 shows idealized moment-curvature
diagrams for rectangular shear walls with different amounts of uniformly
distributed vertical reinforcement. For these diagrams, no axial load was
considered and the shear capacity was assumed to be adequate to develop the
flexural strength.
For comparison purposes, the flexural strength and ultimate curvature of a
shear wall with an amount of vertical reinforcement, Pv == 0. 25 percent,
were assumed to be 100 percent.
Figure 7 shows idealized moment-curvature relationships for walls with
vertical reinforcement concentrated near the edges. As in Fig. 6, the curve
for Pv == 0. 25 percent represents minimum reinforcement uniformly distributed across the wall. Comparison of trends in Figs. 6 and 7 show that, for
the same total amount of vertical reinforcement, shear walls having more
reinforcement near the ends have both higher moment capacity and ultimate
curvature than those with uniformly distributed reinforcement. The inelastic range of deformations is also improved by the concentration of the reinforcement. As a result, concentration of reasonable amounts of vertical reinforcement near the ends of tall shear walls may prove advantageous.
Axial compression on shear walls increases the moment capacity. Axial
tensile loads decrease it. However, axial compression reduces the ultimate
curvature. Consequently, neglecting the presence of compressive loads in
the design of shear walls may result in an overestimate of ultimate curvature and energy absorption.
Figure 8 shows measured moment-curvature relationships for the four test
specimens with M/V == 2. 0 t . Figure 9 shows similar relationships for the
two specimens with M/V == 1':'0 i.w, Moments were measured at the base of the
shear wall and curvatures in Fig. 8 are average rotations measured by
LVDT' s over a 40-in. (1. 00 m) gage length near the restrained area. Curvatures in Fig. 9 are average rotations measured over a 12-in. (30 em)
gage length. Values of measured and calculated ultimate moments and
curvatures and ratios of ultimate to yield moments and curvatures are
listed in Table 3. Calculated values for ultimate moments and curvatures
were based on a limiting concrete compressive strain of 0. 003, strain
compatibility and measur.ed materiaLpraperties.

125
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections
Increase in ductility due to the concentration of reinforcement is apparentfrom the results in Fig. 8 of tests on specimens W -3 and W -6. At ultimate, the curvature of W -6, with concentrated reinforcement is almost
twice that of specimen W -3 with uniformly distributed reinforcement. Results for specimens W -4 and W -5 shown in Fig. 9 also illustrate the influence of reinforcement distribution on the moment-curvature relationship.
In this case, however, the potential ultimate curvature of W-5 was not attained due to a premature shear failure.
Modes of Failure
There were, in general, three distinct modes of failure observed in these
tests. Two of these can be classified as flexural while the third can be defined as a shear failure precipitated by the formation of a 11flexure-shear 11
crack (27.)
Specimen W -1 reached its flexural strength by fracture of some of the
tension reinforcement at the base of the wall. A close-up of this fracture
zone is shown in Fig. 10. As a result of the low amount of reinforcement
used, pv 0. 0027, and the relatively high cracking capacity of the shear
wall, only one crack formed at the base of the wall. After the full elongation of the tensile reinforcement was exhausted, the bars fractured.

Figure 11 shows the flexural hinge observed in most of the other test specimens. The behavior of this specimen is typical of an under-reinforced
section. Its strength is reached by crushing of the concrete in the compression zone after considerable yielding of the tension reinforcement. This
type of behavior produced a more uniform spread of cracks near the base of
the wall as shown in Fig. 11. All specimens, except W-1 and W-5, exhibited these characteristics.
The third type of failure observed in these tests was designated 11flexureshear11 failure. As seen in Fig. 12, the inclined crack in these specimens
initiated from a flexural crack that started at a distance about equal to the
depth of the wall, tw, from the base. With increase in load, the flexural
crack turned toward the support at an angle of about 45. At ultimate,
some of the shear reinforcement across the inclined crack fractured and
the concrete crushed in compression.
ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS
Flexural Strength
The calculated flexural strengths listed in Table 2 were based on Section
10. 2, Assumptions, of ACI 318-71. In addition, the effect of strain hardening of the reinforcement was taken into account. Moment-curvature relationships and flexural strength based on these assumptions were calculated
viith the aid of a computer.

126
response of multistory
concrete structures
to latera I forces
For hand calculations, a simplified equation for flerural strength was developed.
The development of this simplified approach is
described in detail in Appendix B. The flexural strength of rectangular
shear walls containing uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement and sub-jected to an axial load smaller than that producing a balanced failure condition can be approximated as:
.... (1)

where
Mu == design resisting moment at section, in. -lbs.
As == total area of vertical reinforcement at section. sq. in.
fy
~

specified yield strength of vertical reinforcement, psi.

== horizontal length of shear wall, in.

Nu

design axial load, positive if compression, lbs.

distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral

axis, in. (See Appendix B)
capacity reduction factor

Shear Strength

Calculated and measured nominal shear stresses at failure for all specimens
are listed in Table 2. Calculated values are based on the ACI 318-71 shear
strength equations for shear walls. The value of, the understrength factor, was assumed equal to 1. 0. Measured values represent the nominal
shear stress at a section located at a distance Lw/2 from the base of the
wall.
Nominal shear stresses observed atyltimate varied between 1. 7 ./f~ and
psi (0. 451 ,jf~ to 2. 07
kgf/cm 2 ). As indicated in
7. 8
Table 2, the two specimens that failed in flexure-shear, fJW-3 and fJW-5,
had developed a shear stress greater than that calculated for == 1. If the
recommended value of == 0. 85 had been used, the measured to calculated
shear strength ratios of specimens W--3 and fJW -5 are 1. 33 and 1. 35, respectively. It appears then, that the ACI 318 -71 equations for shear
strength of high-rise shear walls provide a conservative estimate of the
strength of these specimens. Furthermore, no reduction in shear strength
due to the proportions of the specimens, such as that postulated by Kani
('Zl ), was observed in any of these tests.

.;r:;;

J6

127
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections

Energy Absorptio.D
The area under the moment-curvature, M - 1/J, diagram is a measure of the
energy absorbing capacity of reinforced concrete members. Consequently,
the variables that affect the energy absorption of walls are the same as those
affecting their moment-curvature characteristics.
Figure 13 shows idealized M -1/J relationships for two rectangular shear wall
sections subjected to bending. In constructing these curves, it was assumed
that the amount of shear reinforcement was sufficient to develop the full
flexural strength of the two walls. One of the sections considered was assumed to contain vertical reinforcement placed near the extreme tension and
compression fibers. For the other case, the reinforcement was assumed to
be uniformly distributed along the cross section. The total area of vertical
reinforcement provided is such that both sections have the same flexural
strength.
The energy-absorbing capacity of the shear wall with reinforcement near the
rmds only can be calculated on the basis of the equations presented by
Blume, Newmark and Corning ( 9).. The equations are based on the simplifying assumptions that the yield moment is equal to the ultimate moment and
the M - 1/J relationship is elasto-plastic.
For the shear wall with the uniform distribution of vertical reinforcement,
the simplifying assumptions of Ref. (9) cannot be directly applied. As
shown in Fig. 13, the moment at first yield is appreciably lower than that
at ultimate. Consequently, the transition from the yield to the ultimate
capacity requires an increase in load. This increase in load depends on the
amount of vertical reinforcement and the presence of axial load.
In practice, most rectangular shear walls contain a distribution of vertical
reinforcement which is intermediate between those illustrated in Fig. 13.
As a result, the shape of their M - 1/> relationship lies somewhere between
the boundaries illustrated.
Table 3 lists the moment-curvature characteristics for the six specimens
tested in this investigation. Characteristics of each specimen and measured and calculated test results are presented in Tables 1 and 2. For specimens fNJ -1, fNJ -2 and fNJ -3 containing increasing amounts of uniformly
distributed vertical reinforcement, the ductility ratio 1/1 I 1/J decreases with
increasing amounts of reinforcement. Measured value~ ale the average
curvature over a 40-in. (1. 00 m) gage length near the base of the walls.
Calculated values were obtained taking into account strain hardening of the
reinforcement and using the assumptions of Chapter 10 of ACI 318-71.
The influence of concentrating some of the vertical reinforcement near the
ends of the cross section is illustrated by the results of specimens fNJ -3

128
response of multistory
concrete structures
to lateral forces

through fN\/-6. Specimens fN\/-3 and SW -4 contained uniformly distributed

vertical reinforcement while fN\/-5 and SW -6 represent an intermediate distribution between uniform and concentrated. Comparisons of curvature
ratios of SW -3 with SW -6 and fN\/-4 with fN\/-5 show the increase in ductility
when reinforcement is concentrated near the ends of shear walls.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The results of this investigation have provided basic information on the behavior and strength of rectangular reinforced concrete shear walls for highrise buildings. Important observations of these tests are listed at the beginning of the report under CONCLUSIONS.
Although no load reversals were considered in these tests, it is expected
that the test results would not be affected because of the relatively small
magnitude of the shear stresses. For earthquake resistant design, particular emphasis should be placed on good detailing of the reinforcement, adequate anchorage and splice lengths, construction joint details, among others,
in order to obtain a satisfactory performance.
The effect of gravity loads acting on shear walls should also be considered.
Neglecting these loads does not necessarily lead to conservative designs.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This investigation was conducted at the Structural Development Laboratory
of the Portland Cement Association under the direction of W. G. Corley,
Manager. The authors thank E. Hognestad, Director, Engineering Development Departman and J. M. Hanson, Assistant Manager, Structural Development Section, Portland Cement Association, for their constructive criticisms made throughout this investigation.
Laboratory Technicians B. J. Doepp, B. W. Fullhart, W. H. Graves, W.
Hummerich, Jr., and 0. A. Kurvits performed the laboratory work.
REFERENCES

1.

ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-71)," American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1971, 78 pp.

2.

Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials,

Pasadena, California, 1970.

3.

dePaiva, H. A. R. and Siess, C. P., "Strength and Behavior of Deep

Beams in Ehear," Proceedings ASCE, V. 91, No. ST5, Part I, October 1965, pp. 19-41.

4.

Slater, W. A., Lord, A. R. and Zipprodt, R. R., "Shear Tests of

Reinforced Concrete Beams," National Bureau of Standards, 1926.

129
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections
5.

Cardenas, A. E., Hanson, J. M., Corley, W. G. and Hognestad, E.,

"Design Provisions for Shear Walls," to be published in the ACI Journal.

6.

ACI Committee 442, 11 Response of Buildings to Lateral Forces," ACI

Journal, Proceedings, V. 68, No. 2, February 1971, pp. 81-106.

7.

Frischmann, W. W. and Prabhu, S. S., "Planning Concepts Using

Shear Walls," Tall Buildings,Pergamon Press, 1967, pp. 49-99.

8.

Davenport, A. G., "The Treatment of Wind Loading on Tall Buildings,"

Tall Buildings, Pergamon Press, 1967, pp. 3-45.

9.

Blume, J. A., Newmark, N. M. and Corning, L. H., "Design of Multistory Reinforced Concrete Buildings for Earthquake Motions," Portland
Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois, 1961, 318 pp.

10.

Rosenblueth, E. and Holtz, I., "Elastic Analysis of Shear Walls in Tall

Buildings," ACI Journal, Proceedings, V. 56, June 1960, pp. 12091222.

11.

Khan, F. R. and Sbarounis, J. A., "Interaction of Shear Walls and

Frames," Proceedings, ASCE, V. 90, ST3, June 1964, pp. 285-335.

12.

"Design of Combined Frames and Shear Walls," Advanced Engineering

Bulletin No. 14, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois, 1965,
36 pp.

13.

Tall Buildings, Pergamon Press, 1967.

14.

McLeod, I. A., "Shear Wall Frame Interaction - A Design Aid with

Commentary," Special Publication SPOll. OlD, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois, April 1971, 62 pp.

15.

Derecho, A. T., "Analysis of Plane Multistory Frame-Shear Wall

Structures Under Lateral and Gravity Loads," Computer Program
Series, SR097. OlD, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois,
1971, 90 pp.

16.

Schwaighofer, J. and Microys, H. F., "Analysis of Shear Walls

Using Standard Computer Programs," ACI Journal, Proceedings,
V. 66, No. 12, December 1969, pp. 1005-1007.

17.

Tomii, M., "Introduction and Summary Design Procedures of Concrete Shear Walls," especially edited for United States - Japan Joint
Seminar, February 1967.

130
response of multistory
concrete structures
to latera I forces

18. Muto, K. and Kokusho, K., rrExperimental Study on Two-Story Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls,U Muto Laboratory, University of Tokyo,
Tokyo, Japan. Translated by T. Akagi, University of Illinois, Urbana,
Illinois, August 1959.
19. Ogura, K., Kokusho, K. and Matsoura N., "Tests to Failure of TwoStory Rigid Frames with Walls," Part 24, Experimental Study No. 6,
Japan Society of Architects Report No. 18, February 1952. Translated
by T. Akagi, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, August 1959.
20. Tsuboi, Y. , Suenaga, Y. and Shigenobu, T. , "Fundamental Study on
Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall Structures - Experimental and Theoretical Study of Strength and Rigidity of Two -Directional Structural Walls
Subjected to Combined stresses M. N. Q. 11 Transactions of the Architectural Institute of Japan, No. 131, January 1967. PCA Foreign
Literature Study No. 536, November 1967.
21. Williams, H. A. and Benjamin, J. R., "Investigation of Shear Walls, -

Part 3 - Experimental and Mathematical Studies of the Behavior of

Plain and Reinforced Concrete Walled Bents Under Static Shear Loading,"
Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, July 1953, 142 pp.

22. Benjamin, J. R. and Williams, H. A., "Investigation of Shear Walls, Part 6 - Continued Experimental and Mathematical Studies of Reinforced Concrete Walled Bents Under Static Shear Loading," Department
of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, August
1954, 59 pp.
23. Benjamin, J. R. and Williams, H. A., "The Behavior of One-Story
Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls," Journal of the Structural Division,
ASCE, V. 83, No. ST3, May 1957. Also Transactions, ASCE, V. 124,
1959, pp. 669-708.
24. Benjamin, J. R. and Williams, H. A., "Behavior of One-Story Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls Containing Openings," ACI Journal, Proceedings, V. 55, November 1958, pp. 605-618.
25. Antebi, J., Utku, S. and Hansen, R. J., "The Response of Shear Walls
to Dynamic Loads," MIT Department of Civil and Sanitary Engineering,
(DASA - 1160), Cambridge, Mass. , August 1960, 290 pp.
26. Bresler, B. and MacGregor, J. G., "Review of Concrete Beams
Failing in Shear," Proceedings, ASCE, V. 93, No. ST1, February
1967, pp. 343-372.

131
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections
27. Kani, G. N. J., "How Safe are Our Large Reinforced Concrete Beams?"
ACI Journal, Proceedings, V. 64, No. 3, March 1967, pp. 128-141.
28. Hognestad, E., Hanson, N. W., Kriz, L. B., and Kurvits, 0. A.,
''Facilities and Test Methods of PCA Structural Laboratory," Journal of
the Portland Cement Association, Research and Development Laboratories, V. 1, No. 1, pp. 12-20 and 40-44, 1959; V. 1, No. 2, pp. 3037, 1959; V. 1, No. 3, pp. 35-41; PCA Development Bulletin D33.
29. Hanson, N. W., Hsu, T. T. C., Kurvits, 0. A., and Mattock, A. H.,
"Facilities and Test Methods of PCA Structural Laboratory -Improvements 1960-65," Journal of the Portland Cement Association, Research
and Development Laboratories, V. 3, No. 2, pp. 27-31, May 1961;
V. 7, No. 1, pp. 2-9, January 1965; and V. 7, No. 2, pp. 24-38, May
1965; PCA Development Bulletin D91.
PCA R/0 Ser. 1498

132
response of multistory
concrete structures
to latera I forces
APPENDIX A
DETAILS OF TEST SPECIMENS
This appendix describes the fabrication, instrumentation and testing of six
shear wall specimens. Methods and procedures employed were those normally used at the PCA Structural Laboratory ( 28, 29).
Fabrication
Because of the relatively large size of the specimens, 28 ft. 9 in. (8. 76 m)
by 6ft. 3 in. (1.91 m), and the small thickness, 3 in. (7. 5 em), all specimens were cast in a horizontal position. This procedure facilitated both the
manufacture of formwork and placement of reinforcement and concrete.
Figure A1 shows one of the specimens before casting. The formwork consisted of a double 3/4 -in. plywood base supported on 2x4 and 2x6 stringers.
The stringers were supported on 2x4 vertical struts properly braced. The
height of the struts was selected to accommodate a tilt-up assembly underneath the double 3/4-in. plywood base.
Reinforcement conforming to ASTM Designation: A-615-68, Grade 60 (4200
kgf/cm 2 ) deformed bars and annealed deformed wire was used in all specimens. The deformed bars were used as flexural (vertical) reinforcement
and the annealed wire as shear (horizontal) reinforcement. Deformed bar
sizes were No. 4 and No. 5. Measured yield stresses for specific groups
of bars used in each specimen are listed in Table 1.
The D4 (A = 0. 04 sq. in. == 0. 26 sq. em) deformed wire reinforcement used
conformed\o ASTM Designation: A-496-64. Because of the relatively high
yield stress of the wire, it was necessary to anneal it to obtain a yield stress
of about 60 ksi. Results of trial runs in the laboratory indicated that annealing the wire at 1100 F for one hour would provide the characteristics
needed. Based on these results, all deformed wire reinforcement was commercially annealed at 1100 F in a gas-fired furnace for a period of one
hour.
Yield stresses obtained for individual groups of reinforcement are listed in
Table 1. Figure A2 shows representative stress-strain curves for both the
deformed bars and deformed wire reinforcement used in all specimens.
The normal weight concrete used was made with a blend of Type I cement and
3/4-in. maximum size Elgin aggregate. Design cylinder compressive
strength at test age, usually 10 days, was 6000 psi (420 kgf/cm 2 ). Measured
concrete strengths are listed in Table 1 in the text. Concrete quality control was based on a measured slump of 3 1 in. All specimens were cured
under polyethylene sheets for a period of 3 days.

133
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections
Instrumentation
Reinforcing bars were instrumented with electrical resistance strain gages.
Vertical bars were instrumented at a section near the base of the wall and
also at a section a distance tw from the base of the wall. Instrumented vertical bars permitted measurement of the strain distribution along the wall at
these two sections. Several horizontal bars placed within a height Jw from
base of the wall were also instrumented. These gages provided an indication
of the strains produced by the shear deformations.
Gages were also placed on the concrete surface. These gages were located
near the base of the wall and at the extreme tension and compression fibers.
other gages were placed at mid-length of the wall.
Rotations near the base of the wall were measured with LVDT 1 s placed near
the extreme tension and compression fibers of the specimens. The LVDT1 s
were connected to directly measure angle changes. Gage lengths for measured average rotations were 40-in. (1. 00 m) for the 21-ft. (6. 40m) high
walls and 12-in. (30 em) for the 12-ft. (3, 66 m) high walls.
Lateral deflections of all specimens were measured at 3 ft. (91 em) or
18-in. (45 em) intervals from the base of the wall. Graduated scales were
read with a precision level (28) that has an optical micrometer reading to
0. 001 in. Out-of-plane deflections were measured near the cantilever end
of the wall using mechanical dial gages reading to 0. 001 inches.
Applied axial and lateral loads were measured with load cells. Reactions at
the restraining portion of the specimens were also measured with load cells.
All of this instrumentation was connected to continuous oscillographic recorders or strain indicator boxes as required. Figure A3 shows some of
the locations where instrumentation was used in the specimens.
Test Procedure
After the specimens were set in the test rig, readings were taken to assess
the effects of dead weight and loading equipment. The axial compression
force was then applied in increments. At the end of each increment, outof-plane deflections were checked. When necessary, adjustments were
made in the position of the hydraulic rams to insure that no large out-ofplane deflections occurred.
After the full axial load was applied, lateral load was applied by hydraulic
rams. The number of increments of lateral load to obtain failure was
usually between 10 and 15. After each increment, all instrumentation was
read and cracks were marked and recorded. In addition, load versus deflection and load versus maximum compressive strain were continuously
monitored on X-Y recorders throughout the test.

134
response of multistory
concrete structures
to latera I forces
APPENDIX B
EQUATIONS FOR FLEXURAL STRENGTH
As a part of this investigation, a simple equation to calculate the flexural
strength of rectangular shear walls with uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement was developed. The solution is developed in accordance with
Section 10 . 2, Assumptions, of ACI 318-71 (1).
Figure B1(a) shows the cross section of a rectangular shear wall subjected
to combined bending and axial load. The total area of reinforcement, A ,
is assumed to be a continuous line of steel albng the fulllmqth of the wa11.
The assumed strain distribution at ultimate is shown in Fig. B1(b). This
distribution implies that the load producing failure is smaller than that at
balanced failure conditions.
From equilibrium of forces as shown in Figs. B1(c) and Bl(d):
pifl (tw - c (1 + /3)] ~ + Nu == 0, 85 f~ {31hc + pJlc (1- {3) fy

, .... (1)

where
Pv

As/twh

h
thickness of shear wall, in.
tw
depth or horizontal length of shear wall, in.
c == distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis, in.
ey~o.003

f3
fy

specified yield strength of reinforcement, psi

Nu

design axial load at section, positive if compression, lbs.

f~

==

f31

specified compressive strength of concrete, psi

a factor defined in Section 10. 2. 7, ACI 318-71

From Eq. (1) the distance from the extreme compression fiber to the
neutral axis, c, becomes:
c

rw
where

w+a
2 w + 0. 85{31

..... (2)

135
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections

(3)

and
01

=:

Nu
hf~

.... (4)

J.w

The ultimate resisting moment, Mu, of the cross section becomes:

Nu ) (1
{31 c )
c2 - 1
Mu == Asfytw [ ( 1 + A I "2' - IT - T
\ + 3{!
s y
w
w

'J

- (31 )

..... (5)

Equation (5) can be approximated, without significant loss of accuracy, by eliminating the terms containing c2 I t:V and dropping (31 Equation (5) then
reduces to:
.... (6)

Figure B2 shows a comparison of results using Eqs. (5) and (6) for different
amounts of uniformly distributed flexural reinforcement. Two values of
axial compressive load are plotted: Nu == 0 and Nu == 0. 25 f~ J.wh. The results show that for the case of pure bending, N == 0, the approximate Eq.
(6) compares very well with the results of the fAore exact Eq. (5).
The above derivations are limited to rectangular shear walls with uniformly
distributed reinforcement and subjected to an axial load smaller than that
producing balanced flexural failure. In practice the magnitude of the axial
compression load is almost always smaller than Nu == 0. 25 f~ i.wh. Since
Eq. (5) is applicable up to Nu == 0. 425 {31 f~ J.wh, the proposed flexural
strength equations should apply to most rectangular shear walls found in
practice. Similar equations can be derived for different shear wall cross
sections and for distributions of vertical reinforcement other than uniform.

136
response of multistory
concrete structures
to lateral forces
APPENDIX C
NOTATION

total area of vertical reinforcement at section, sq. in.

area of horizontal shear reinforcement within a distance, s, sq. in.
c

distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis, in.

distance from extreme compression fiber to resultant of tension

force, in.

story shear forces, lbs.

square root of specified compressive strength of concrete, psi

f'

specified compressive strength of concrete, psi

specified yield strength of reinforcement, psi

thickness of shear wall, in.

total height of wall from its base to its top, in.

==

depth or horizontal length of shear wall, in.

==

design resisting moment at section, in. -lbs.

axial stress at the point of contraflexure
design axial load at section, positive if compression, lbs.

Af/J-hf'
sy w c
vertical spacing of horizontal shear reinforcement, in.
nominal permissible shear stress carried by concrete, psi
nominal total design shear stress, psi
shear force at the point of contraflexure, lbs.
total applied design shear force at section, lbs.
N jJ. h f'
u w c
f.y/0.003

137
strength of high-rise
shear wallsrectangular cross sections

(31

fraction defining location of the neutral axis, (Section 10. 2. 7, ACI

318-71)
capacity reduction factor (Section 9. 2, ACI 318-71)
== Av/sh

A/.ewh
curvature at ultimate load
curvature at yield load

00

TABLE 1 -Dimensions and Material Properties of Test Specimens

Concrete
Reinforcement
Compressive Tensile
Vertical
Horizontal
Splitting Amount Yield Amount Yield Axial
Mark Height Strength*
Strength*
Stress
Stress Stress
f
f'
p
**
ph
Nu/i.wh
fy
f~p
y
v
~
c
psi
psi
psi
psi
psi
ft.
21.0
21.0
21.0
12.0
12.0
21.0

'ENJ-1
'ENJ-2
fNV-3
fJVJ -4
fNV-5
fNV-6

7420
6880
6780
6740
5900
5950

660
650
615
585
565
590

0.0027 60,200
0.0100 65,400
0. 0300 66,080
0. 0300 60,000
0.0230+ 60,000
0.0230+ 63,000

0.0027
0.0027
0.0027
0.0027
0.0027
0.0027

61,300
61,000
60,000
60,000
60,000
70,000

415
430
420
430
425
430

------

* Taken as the average of 3 or more concrete cylinders in critical area.

** flv

.e:h , where As= total area of vertical reinforcement, Lw

=75 in.

h = 3 in.
+ One-third of total vertical reinforcement concentrated within a distance
Lw/10 from either extremity of cross-section (amount of reinforcement
in interior region Pvw = 0. 01).
(1ft. = 0. 305 m; 1 psi = 0. 07 kgf/cma)

en
"'0
0
:::::1
en
CD

.....
0

ii)

.....
CD
.....

Ill

d'
.....
n
CD

en

~
-.
(!)

::::'1
(C

.....
:::r

( /)

:::r

gJ

~
;;;
TABLE 2- Test Results
Calculated

Shear Streng'.'>.

Flexural Strength

Para.."!leters

Moment
Mark

to Shear

Ratio

Ratio
M/Vu

dftw

at w/2
from
Base
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW-4
SW-5
SW-6
L_____

2. Otw

~:g!w

l.Otw
1.0w

2.0~

----

at
ultimate

0. 58
0.62
0. 71
0.71
0. 78
0. 78
L--

Calculated*

Measured
Moment,~~

Moment,

1\,

Calculated
~+

Measured

'
.....
Shear, vu' : ~
at tw/2,

at base

at base

kip-ft.

kip-ft.

kip-ft.

kips

406
675
1073
1077
1078
1179

379
650
1200
1139
1121
1154

356
609
1181
1108

26.5
41.4
66.0
108.6
108.6
72.5

. hd.Jf'
c

Ca!culated * *

Measured

CaiculateC!
vc + vs Mo;,ent s:~ear at Observed
Mode of
at the
tw/2
Failure
Base
from
.jf~
Base

:
1.7
2.8
4. 5
7.4
7.8
5.3

3.9
4.0
4. 0
6. 6
6.8
4.4

I
I

1.07
1. 04
0. 90
0. 95
0. 96
1. 02

! 0.44

0. 70
1. 13
1. 12
1. 15
1. 20

Flexure
Flexure
Flexure -Shear
Flexure
FleX"Jre-Shear

Flexu.re

Based on compressive concrete limiting strain of 0. 003, strain compatibility and measured material properties including strai."l harderJng
of steel.
Calculated from ACI 318-71 Code shear strength equations.
+ According to Eq. (1).
++ d used is 0. Btw or greater.
(1 kip-ft. = 0.138 ton-m; 1 kip= 0. 453 ton; ~psi = 0. 265 .jf~ kg:f/cm)

....

w
c.c

140

response to lateral forces

TABLE 3 -Moment-Curvature Test Results

Mark

SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW-4
SW-5
SW-6

Measured
M
1/Ju
u
Millionths/in.
My

223
116
94
190
225
186

1. 13
1. 37
1. 29
1. 35
1. 18
1. 31

1/Ju

1/J;
7.0
3.6
1.8
2. 5
3.3
3. 9

1 millionth/in. = 0. 4 millionths/em

Calculated
M
1/Ju
u
Million ths/in. My

186
143
103
117
133
120

1. 17
1. 48
1. 43
1. 42
1. 30
1.28

1/Ju
lp

4.8
4. 1
2. 5
2.7
3.4
3. 1

141

strength of shear wa lis

Frome

Shear Wall

_,r----/'----,~

_.r-----~----~.

(a) Loads

(b) Frome

(c) Shear Wall

Fig. 1. Interaction between frame and shear wall

v\17~
N
(a) Shear Diagram

(b) Moment Diagram

Fig. 2. Forces acting on a high-rise shear wall

(c) Forces on Lower Portion

142

response to lateral forces

a) Dimensions: Plan View

Post-tensioning
representing
gravity load

Area

Arrangement for lateral loads

b) Test Setup: Elevation

Fig. 3. Shear wall specimen: dimensions and test setup

Fig. 4. Test setup for shear wall investigation

143

strength of shear walls

60" ~As

tw=75"

~h=3"

fJv =A 8 /\wh
(a) Uniform

(b) Concentrated

Fig. 5. Distribution of vertical reinforcement in

test specimens

Curvature, ojl, percent

Fig. 6. Moment-curvature relationships for rectangular shear walls

144

response to lateral forces

1200

I
I

1000

I
I
I

800

~=0.003

__...10.25%

0.8tw

lw=25h

I
I
\

Moment,M,
600
percent

=fO.Itw

1 JOI~

fiji

Cross
Section

Strain Distribution
at Ultimate

\
p

=0.5%

',~Limiting

'

.......

---

80

60

.......

curvatures

100

Curvature, ojl, percent

Fig. 7. Effect of reinforcement distribution on moment-curvature

SW-6

Moment,M,

k.-ft.

50

100

150

200

Average curvature over a 40-in gage length,oj!, millionths/in.

I kip-ft.= 0.138 Ton-m ; I millionth I in. = 0.4 millionth /em.

Fig. 8. Measured moment-curvature relationships

145

strength of shear walls

1200r----r---,r---.----,----,----,,---.---~--~

Moment,M,
k.-ft.

50

100

150

Average curvature over a 12-in. gage length, 1/l,millionths

Fig. 9 Measured moment-curvature relationships

Fig. 10. Failure by fracture of the reinforcement

200

146

Fig. 11. Failure by crushing of the concrete

response to lateral forces

147

strength of shear walls

't

~JJ
~~

Fig. 12. Flexure-shear failure

Moment, M
My

'/lu
Curvature, '/1

Fig. 13. Energy absorption of shear walls

I\

response to lateral forces

148

Fig. Al. Shear wall before casting

100.---------------------------------------~

Annealed Wire

80

60
Stress,
ksi

Deformed Bars

40

00~----------~~------------~----------~

0.01

0.02

Strain

Fig. A2. Reinforcement stress-strain relationships

0.03

strength of shear walls

149

150

response to lateral forces

0.851~

0.003

~
c

fy

,8 ,c
__!_

lw

71y

(a) Cross
Section

(b) Strain Distribution;

(c) Concrete Stress

Distribution
and Axial Load

f!y

.B=o:oo3

(d) Steel Stress

Distribution

Fig. Bl. Assumptions at flexural strength of rectangular shear walls

2.0

Flexural
51 rength,

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

fy= 60,000psi (4219kgf/cm 2 )

\

A8 fy\w

''

f~= 4,000 psi (281 kgf/cmZ)

\

\ '\
1.0

Eq.(5)

Eq.(6)~',,.,.

-c.

Eq.(5)

..,.:::=:---------7
" .....

---.~---"T---=------======aa=O
=0.25
Eq.{6)

1.0
2.0
3.0
Amount of Uniformly Distributed Vertical Reinforcemenl,p, percent

Fig. B2. Flexural strength of rectangular shear walls