Structures and Buildings Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers

Analysis of composite steel plate shear http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/stbu.11.00089

walls connected with frame beams only Paper 1100089
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang Received 01/12/2011 Accepted 04/01/2013
Keywords: composite structures/seismic engineering/structures & design

ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Analysis of composite steel

plate shear walls connected
with frame beams only
j
1 Lanhui Guo PhD j
3 Xinbo Ma PhD
Associate Professor of Structural Engineering, Key Laboratory of Center of Science and Technology of Construction, Ministry of
Concrete and Pre-Stressed Concrete Structure of Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, Beijing, PR China
Education, Southeast University, Nanjing, PR China; Harbin Institute j
4 Sumei Zhang PhD
of Technology, Harbin, PR China Professor of Structural Engineering, School of Civil Engineering,
j
2 Qin Rong Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, PR China
PhD Student of Structural Engineering, School of Civil Engineering,
Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, PR China

j
1 j
2 j
3 j
4

A composite steel plate shear wall system consists of a steel plate shear wall with reinforced concrete panels
attached to one side or both sides by bolts or connectors. This arrangement restrains the possible occurrence of out-
of-plane buckling of thin-walled steel plate, thus significantly increasing the load-carrying capacity and ductility of
the overall wall. Experimental studies on composite steel plate shear walls and steel plate shear walls connected
with frame beams were carried out. The experimental results illustrated the good ductility and excellent energy
dissipation capacity of composite steel plate shear walls. The load-carrying capacity and energy dissipation capacity
of steel plate shear walls clearly increased compared with those of steel plate shear walls. Meanwhile, a finite-
element model was developed to analyse the behaviour of steel plate shear walls and composite steel plate shear
walls, and its accuracy was validated by making comparisons with the experimental results. Based on the finite-
element analysis results, a simplified model of steel plate shear walls was proposed, and it is suggested that this can
be used in the analysis of shear wall systems in high-rise buildings.

Notation º height-to-thickness ratio of steel plate (º ¼ H/t )

A area of steel plate  Poisson’s ratio of steel
Ab area of brace y yield stress of brace
Es Young’s modulus of steel
fu tensional strength of steel 1. Introduction
fv shear yield stress of steel Composite steel plate shear walls (CSPSWs) can be an attractive
fy yield stress of steel option for lateral load resisting systems in both new buildings
G shear modulus of steel and retrofit constructions. A CSPSW consists of a steel plate with
H height of steel plate reinforced concrete (RC) panels attached to one or both sides by
I moment inertia of steel plate bolts or connectors. The main function of the RC panels is to
K0 elastic rigidity of steel plate resist the out-of-plane buckling of a steel plate; thus the shear
L width of steel plate strength and energy dissipation capacity of CSPSWs are im-
t thickness of steel plate proved. Compared with traditional RC shear walls, CSPSWs with
tc thickness of RC panel the same shear capacity, and most likely larger shear stiffness,
Vc calculated load-carrying capacity will have smaller thickness and less weight. Compared with steel
Ve experimental load-carrying capacity plate shear walls (SPSWs), the RC panels resist the out-of-plane
Vmax load-carrying capacity of CSPSW deformation of the steel plate and prevent its buckling before it
 panel aspect ratio of steel plate ( ¼ L/H) yields. As a result, the shear yield capacity of the steel plate is
 elongation ratio of steel higher than its capacity to resist shear in yielding of diagonal
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
1
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings
tension field, and shows higher energy dissipation capacity
(Astaneh-Asl, 2002).
With regard to CSPSWs connected to both frame columns and
frame beams, two half-scale three-storey composite shear wall
specimens were tested by Zhao and Astaneh-Asl (2004). The
experimental results illustrated the good ductility and excellent
energy dissipation capacity of CSPSWs. Four CSPSWs with slits,
with attached RC panels on both sides, were tested by Hitaka and
Matsui (2003) to investigate the confining effect of RC panels on
steel plate. In 2006, the finite-element method was applied to
study the influence of precast RC panels on the static behaviour
of CSPSWs, and the minimum thickness of RC panel to resist
out-of-plane buckling of steel plate was proposed (Zhang et al.,
2008). Tsai et al. (2007) conducted a series of composite shear
wall tests, whose results were compared with that of SPSW to
illustrate the function of RC panels. Guo et al. (2009) tested the
hysteretic behaviour of CSPSWs under cyclic loads. Their
experimental results demonstrated the superiority of CSPSWs.
Experimental and numerical studies on CSPSWs were undertaken
by Rahai and Hatami (2009). Their results indicated that increas-
ing the number of shear studs improved the ductility of CSPSWs.
2. Objective
Despite the benefits of traditional CSPSWs connected to both
frame columns and frame beams, they are not widely used. The
limited implementation of CSPSWs is a direct result of: (a) the
traditional CSPSW configurations, which result in large column
dimensions and prohibits the use of narrow walls, thereby
reducing the system’s economy; (b) the numerical models used to
analyse CSPSW systems are cumbersome and overly time
consuming for engineers. To reduce column demands in
CSPSWs, CSPSWs connected to frame beams only were pro-
posed. This strategy lowers the column demands resulting from
frame action, and is effective at limiting the axial demands
resulting from the global overturning moment, especially for tall
wall systems. Also, it is convenient for the opening of windows
or doors. Meanwhile, the structural stiffness and load-carrying
capacity under horizontal loads can be adjusted by changing the
size or the number of shear walls, which is welcomed by both
structural engineers and architects (Guo et al., 2011).
With regard to CSPSWs connected to frame beams, only three
Specimen t: mm fy : N/mm2 fu : N/mm2
S1 2.75 294.7 429.9
SC1 2.75 272.6 405.6
SC2 2.75 294.7 429.9
SC3 2.00 296.2 425.0
Note: Ve is the experimental load-carrying capacity; Vc is the calculated load-carrying capacity based on finite-element analysis.
Table 1. Thicknesses and steel properties
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
2
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang
scaled single-span, single-floor specimens with aspect ratio
greater than 2.0 were tested under monotonic loads or cyclic
loads by Sun et al. (2007). Their experimental results illustrated
that local buckling was seen to occur at the corner of the steel
plate, and connection details between steel plate and boundary
beams were critical to protect against the premature failure of
CSPSWs. Up till now, only a few tests concerning CSPSWs
connected to frame beams have been performed, and there is no
design guideline regarding this. As CSPSWs are not connected to
frame columns, the load cannot be transmitted by frame columns.
Hence, the rigidity, load-carrying capacity and hysteretic behav-
iour are different from the traditional CSPSWs. Therefore, it is
necessary to conduct the study on this part to clearly understand
the behaviour of CSPSWs connected to frame beams only. This
paper carried out the experimental and numerical study on
CSPSWs connected to frame beams only.
3. Experiments
3.1 Design and fabrication
In a common structural building, the storey height is about 3 m.
Considering the loading capacity of the experimental set-up,
four 1/3-scale specimens were fabricated and tested. These
included three CSPSWs and one SPSW. The SPSW is referred
to as S1, while the CSPSWs are referred to as SC1–SC3, whose
parameters were listed in Table 1. The scaled specimens can
reveal the hysteretic behaviour of CSPSWs under cyclic load,
the results of which were also applied to validate the accuracy
of finite-element (FE) analysis results. The frame is single-bay,
single-storey with pin-ended beam-to-column connections to
ensure the shear walls resist overall lateral load without the
influence of the frame. The steel plate is connected to frame
beams by four stiffened 125 mm 3 125 mm 3 10 mm web an-
gles. High-strength bolts with diameter of 20 mm are used to
connect the steel plate and web angles, as well as the web
angles and frame beams. The dimensions of steel plate are
1200 mm 3 1100 mm. In the vertical direction, the distance
between two bolt centres is 1100 mm (see Figure 1(a)). The
effective dimensions of the steel plate are 1100 mm 3 1100 mm,
and the corresponding aspect ratio L/H is equal to 1.0, where L
and H are effective plate length and plate height, respectively.
The 16 mm diameter bolt holes are drilled in the steel plate,
whose distribution is shown in Figure 1(a).
Es : 3105 N/mm2  : % Ve : kN Vc : kN
2.151 0.31 35.5 206.9 214.0
1.994 0.295 28.70 370.9 338.5
2.151 0.31 35.5 392.8 365.6
1.920 0.29 25.3 297.2 267.4
IP: 61.167.60.237
Structures and Buildings Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang

Treated with ball spray

115

50 150 200 ⫻ 4 ⫽ 800 150

∅16 bolt hole
Web angle
50 200 ⫻ 5 ⫽ 1000 50 Stiffener stiffener
1200
970

10 mm
∅22 bolt hole 10 mm gap
10 mm gap
Bolt
115

70 ⫻ 14 ⫽ 980 RC panel
60 60
1100 Web angle

(a) (b)

Figure 1. Configuration of specimens SPSW and CSPSW:

(a) configuration of steel plate; (b) specimen of CSPSW and local
configuration

Based on the finite-element analysis, it was found that the
thickness of the RC panels should be over 40 mm to prevent the
out-of-plane buckling of the steel plate. Also, considering the
guideline of the American ANSI/AISC 341-05 (ANSI/AISC,
2005), the RC thickness shall be a minimum of 4 in. (100 mm)
on each side for full-scale specimens. Horizontal and vertical
reinforcement are provided in the concrete encasement to meet or
exceed the detailing requirements in ACI 318 Section 14.3 (ACI,
2008). The reinforcement ratio in both directions should not be
less than 0. 25%. For convenient construction, the 60 mm
thickness RC panel is selected to ensure that the steel plate can
reach its yield stress prior to overall or local buckling. Each RC
panel has dimensions of 1100 mm 3 950 mm 3 60 mm with two
layers of steel bars. The reinforcement ratio is 0.785% along the
horizontal and vertical directions. The distance between the bolt
holes on the concrete panel is 200 mm. A 16 mm external
diameter plastic tube is fixed in the RC form. Two RC panels
were attached to the inner steel plate by 10 mm diameter bolts
through 16 mm holes, as shown in Figure 1(b). In addition,
10 mm gaps were adopted between RC panels and steel web
angles (namely unrestrained strip). The aim is to avoid early
contact between the RC panels and the web angles, and make
sure that the RC panels resist the out-of-plane deformation
without taking lateral loads. For CSPSWs, four short stiffeners
with dimension of 250 mm 3 50 mm 3 4.75 mm were welded at
each corner (see Figure 1(b)). The function of the stiffeners is to
avoid the early failure of CSPSWs at the unrestrained strip, the
efficiency of which was demonstrated by Guo et al. (2008).
To determine the steel material properties, three tensile coupons
were cut from each steel sheet in accordance with the Chinese
standard GB/T2975 (Code of China, 1998). The material proper-
ties are listed in Table 1, where t is the thickness of steel plate,
and fy , fu , Es , ,  are steel yield stress, tensile strength, elastic
modulus, Poisson ratio and elongation ratio, respectively. Three
150 mm cubes were cast for each batch of concrete mix. The
average compressive strength of the tested 150 mm concrete cube
was 33.0 N/mm2 :

Rigid beam Four-bar connection Hinged frame Cyclic horizontal shear force
LVDT

100 100
300 300 300

Actuator
Specimen
LVDT
specimen
Reaction wall

Figure 2. Experimental set-up

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 61.167.60.237
3
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings
3.2 Experimental set-up
The experimental set-up is shown in Figure 2. A hinged frame
was installed in the existing loading system. This was carried out
to ensure the shear wall resisted only the cyclic horizontal loads
induced by an electro-hydraulic servo actuator directly, without
rotation. The interstorey displacement was measured by linear
variable displacement transducers (LVDTs) installed at the top
beam, as shown in Figure 2. At the mid-height of SPSW, four
LVDTs were installed to measure the out-of-plane deformation of
the steel plate. The loading method was developed according to
the Chinese code JGJ 101-96 (Code of China, 1996). At the
elastic stage, the horizontal force was regarded as the controlling
criteria and repeated once at each step. At the plastic stage, the
horizontal displacement was regarded as the controlling criteria
and repeated twice at each step.
4. Experimental results
For SPSW S1, buckling at the corner appeared when the load
reached 39% of the load-carrying capacity. When the load
reached 77% of the load-carrying capacity, a tension field formed
along the diagonal direction, and buckling waves appeared on the
plate. At this loading cycle, the pinching effects of the hysteretic
curves were evident. As the loading direction changed, the
(a) (b)
(e)
Figure 3. Experimental phenomena of S1 and SC1: (a) two
diagonal tension strips of S1; (b) buckling of stiffener; (c) fracture
at unrestrained strip; (d) failure of steel plate near stiffener;
(e) fracture on unrestrained strip; (f) steel plate after taking off
RC panels; (g) crack distribution on RC panel
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
4
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang
direction of the buckling waves changed. After that, the rigidity
decreased with the increase of interstorey displacement. When
the interstorey displacement reached 16 mm (interstorey drift of
1.45%), two diagonal tension strips appeared (see Figure 3(a)),
and the corresponding out-of-plane deformation was 36 mm. The
interstorey drift is equal to the interstorey displacement divided
by the effective height of the steel plate. The load-carrying
capacity of 206.94 kN (202.36 kN) was reached with a corre-
sponding interstorey displacement of 19.5 mm (18.6 mm). After
that, the load decreased slightly with the increase of interstorey
displacement. When the interstorey drift reached 3.6%, the load
decreased to 92.8% of the load-carrying capacity. This also
illustrates that the SPSW connected to frame beams possesses
good ductility behaviour. The hysteretic curve of specimen S1 is
shown in Figure 4(a).
For CSPSWs, the specimens remained elastic up to 80% of the
load-carrying capacity. After that, it was found that local buckling
near the bottom of the steel plate appeared. Compared with the
SPSW, the stiffeners and RC panels delayed the appearance of
buckling at the corner. When the interstorey displacement reached
25 mm, the stiffeners had a tendency to buckle with out-of-plane
deformation. Concrete cracks appeared and developed around the
(c) (d)
(f) (g)
Structures and Buildings Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang

Interstorey drift: % Interstorey drift: %

⫺4·5 ⫺3·6 ⫺2·7 ⫺1·8 ⫺0·9 0 0·9 1·8 2·7 3·6 4·5 ⫺4·5 ⫺3·6 ⫺2·7 ⫺1·8 ⫺0·9 0 0·9 1·8 2·7 3·6 4·5
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
Load: kN

Load: kN
50 50
0 0
⫺50 ⫺50
⫺100 ⫺100
⫺150 ⫺150
⫺200 ⫺200
⫺250 ⫺250
⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50 ⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Interstorey displacement: mm Interstorey displacement: mm
(a) (b)

Interstorey drift: % Interstorey drift: %

⫺4·5 ⫺3·6 ⫺2·7 ⫺1·8 ⫺0·9 0 0·9 1·8 2·7 3·6 4·5 ⫺4·5 ⫺3·6 ⫺2·7 ⫺1·8 ⫺0·9 0 0·9 1·8 2·7 3·6 4·5
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
Load: kN

Load: kN

50 50
0 0
⫺50 ⫺50
⫺100 ⫺100
⫺150 ⫺150
⫺200 ⫺200
⫺250 ⫺250
⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50 ⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Interstorey displacement: mm Interstorey displacement: mm
(c) (d)

Figure 4. Hysteretic curves of SPSW S1 and CSPSW: (a) S1;

(b) SC1; (c) SC2; (d) SC3

bolts. The direction of the cracks was along the diagonal energy dissipation capacity of CSPSW increased compared with
direction, as the RC panels prevented the out-of-plane buckling those of SPSW. The reason was that the RC panels restrained the
with their flexural rigidity. When the interstorey drift reached out-of-plane buckling of the steel plate.
1/30, the buckling deformation of the unrestrained strip and
stiffeners was pronounced. Fractures at the unrestrained strip Figure 5(c) shows the comparison of skeleton curves for speci-
appeared and developed rapidly, thus the test was stopped. After mens S1 and SC2. It illustrates that both SPSW and CSPSW
taking off the RC panels, it was found that the restrained steel possess good ductility. The initial rigidities of specimen S1 and
plate remained plane, and the failure position focused on the SC2 were close to each other, while the load-carrying capacity of
bottom of the steel plate. In further research, some better SC2 was 48% higher than that of S1. It can be concluded that the
solutions should be taken to avoid failure at an unrestrained strip. RC panels provide an effective way to prevent the out-of-plane
The experimental phenomena for specimen SC1 are shown in buckling of steel plate, thus the load-carrying capacity increases
Figure 3(b)–(g). Figure 4 presents the load–interstorey displace- noticeably.
ment relationship curves of CSPSWs. It can be seen that CSPSWs
possess good ductility and high energy dissipation capacity.
5. Finite-element analysis
The hysteretic curves measured under different interstorey drifts 5.1 Finite-element model
for specimens S1 and SC2 are shown in Figure 5(a) and Figure The commercial finite-element software Ansys was used to
5(b). The main difference for these two specimens is that RC analyse the mechanical performance of SPSWs and CSPSWs. A
panels are attached on both sides of SC2. During the initial single-bay, single-storey frame with pinned beam-to-column con-
loading, there was no evident difference in their response. With nections was developed. The SPSW or CSPSW was connected
the increase of interstorey drift, the load-carrying capacity and with frame beams only. The beam element ‘BEAM 189’ was
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
5
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang

500
and columns was restrained, and the monotonic lateral load was
S1 400
applied at the top beam.
300
SC2
200 For steel, the constitutive equation is a bi-linear model. It depends
Load: kN

100 on the parameters of steel yield stress ‘fy ’ and elastic modulus
0 ‘Es ’. For concrete, the constitutive equation is based on the cross-
⫺15 ⫺10 ⫺5 0 5 10 15
⫺100 sectional moment ‘M’ and rotation ‘Ł’ relations of the RC panel.
⫺200 It is assumed that the moment in the cross-section remains
⫺300 constant when the moment of the cross-section reaches the
⫺400 cracked moment ‘Mcr ’. Thus the M–Ł reaction curve is also bi-
⫺500 linear, and the constitutive equation can obtained according to this
Interstorey displacement: mm assumption. It is similar to the equation of steel and related to the
(a) tensile strength of concrete ‘ftk ’ and the elastic modulus of
concrete ‘Ec ’ (see Figure 6). The relationship between Mcr and ftk
500
is shown in Equation 1. The main function of RC panels is to
S1 400
resist the out-of-plane buckling of steel plate, but not to partici-
300
SC2 pate in carrying the shear force. From the test results, it can be
200
seen that there was a visible frictional trace on the inner surface of
Load: kN

100 the RC panel, but there was no obvious damage. In order to

0 analyse the behaviour of the CSPSWs and compute the conver-
⫺15 ⫺10 ⫺5 0 5 10 15
⫺100 gence easily, the curve equation of compression for concrete is
⫺200 conservatively selected as the equation of tension for concrete
⫺300
⫺400
⫺500 1: M cr ¼ f tk bt2c =6
Interstorey displacement: mm
(b)
where b is the width of calculated plate strip and tc is the
500
thickness of the RC panel.
S1 400
300 For the composite shear wall model, the nodes on the RC panels
SC2 200 are coupled with the inner steel plate, in the out-of-plane
Load: kN

100 direction (z direction), at the positions with bolts. The deforma-

0 tion of the steel plate is equal to the deformation of the RC panel
⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50
⫺100 at the location of the bolts. Thus the out-plane deformation of the
⫺200 steel plate is restrained by the RC panels. The length and height
⫺300 of the RC panels are equivalent to the steel plate in the model
⫺400 analysed. During the fabrication and erection of the shear walls,
⫺500 the initial deformation inevitably exists on the steel plate. In
Interstorey displacement: mm analysis, the first-order buckling mode was introduced as the
(c)

Figure 5. Comparison between S1 and SC2: (a) interstorey drift of M σ

1/100; (b) interstorey drift of 1/50; (c) skeleton curves of S1 and SC2
Mcr ftk

Ec
used to simulate the frame beams and frame columns, and the 1
shell element ‘Shell181’ was used to simulate the steel plate and O O f /E
θ tk c ε
RC panels. The ‘Shell181’ element was suitable for the analysis
(a) (b)
of thin or moderately thick shell structures. It was well-suited for
linear, large rotation, and large strain non-linear applications. In Figure 6. Equivalent strain–stress relationship of RC panels:
order to investigate the mechanical behaviour of shear walls, the (a) moment–curvature relationship of RC panel cross-section;
stiffness of beams and columns was assumed as a rigid member (b) equivalent strain–stress relationship of RC panels
in the model. In addition, the out-of-plane deformation of beams
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
6
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang

300 500
400
200
300
100 200
Load: kN

Load: kN
100
0 0
⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50 ⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50
⫺100
⫺100
⫺200
⫺200 ⫺300
Test Test
⫺400
⫺300 FEM ⫺500 FEM

Interstorey displacement: mm Interstorey displacement: mm

(a) (b)

500 400
400 300
300
200
200
100
Load: kN

100
Load: kN

0 0
⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50 ⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50
⫺100 ⫺100
⫺200
⫺200
⫺300
Test ⫺300 Test
⫺400
⫺500 FEM ⫺400 FEM

Interstorey displacement: mm Interstorey displacement: mm

(c) (d)

700 90
70
500
50
300 (Gao, 2007) (Lu and Li, 2009)
30
Load: kN
Load: kN

100 10
⫺100 ⫺10
Test ⫺30 Test
⫺300
FEM ⫺50 FEM
⫺500 ⫺70
⫺700 ⫺90
⫺60 ⫺45 ⫺30 ⫺15 0 15 30 45 60 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30
Interstorey displacement: mm Interstorey displacement: mm
(e) (f)

Figure 7. Comparison between theoretical and experimental

results: (a) S1; (b) SC1; (c) SC2; (d) SC3; (e) CW2; (f) IC-280B-1

imperfection shape of steel plate, and the maximum out-of-plane elasto-plastic stage was much larger than that of SPSW because
deformation was equal to 1/1000 of the span of the steel plate. of bolt slippage and the buckling of unrestrained strips. The
comparison of bearing capacities is listed in Table 1. It can be
Figure 7 shows the comparison of the load–interstorey displace- seen that experimental results are higher than the calculated
ment reaction curves between the numerical results and the results. The reason is that RC panels contact with frame beams
experimental results in this paper and other references (Gao, and participate in resisting lateral loads under large interstorey
2007; Lu and Li, 2009). The parameters of specimens from displacement. According to the comparative results carried out
other references are listed in Table 2. It can be seen that they above, the FEM model can be used to model the static
agree well with each other. For CSPSW, the difference in the behaviour of CSPSWs.
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
7
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang

Specimen H: mm L: mm t: mm fy : N/mm2 º tc : mm fc : N/mm2 Ve : Kn Vc : kN Reference

CW2 820 1800 2.00 287 410 60 32.3 607 622 Gao, 2007
IC-280B-1 810 280 3.5 300 231 35 28.0 79 81 Lu and Li, 2009

Note: fc is the compressive strength of RC panel; Ve is the experimental load-carrying capacity; Vc is the calculated load-carrying capacity based on
finite-element analysis.

Table 2. Dimensions and strength of specimens

5.2 Parameter analysis of CSPSWs 5.2.1 Thickness of RC panel

In the following analysis, a single-bay, single-storey frame with
pin-ended beam-to-column connections was developed. The steel
plate was connected to frame beams. The yield strength of steel
plate is 235 N/mm2 , and the compressive concrete strength is
30 N/mm2 : The RC panels are attached on both sides of the steel
plate.
The influence of RC panel thickness, tc , on the monotonic
mechanical performance was investigated. The length and height
of steel plate were both 3000 mm. The RC panel thickness varied
from 0 mm to 55 mm. Under horizontal load, the behaviour of
CSPSWs connected to frame beams was analysed. Figure 8(a)
and Figure 8(b) show the shear stress against interstorey drift

120 120

100 100
Shear stress: N mm⫺2
Shear stress: N mm⫺2

80 80

60 60

Steel plate tc ⫽ 20 mm
40 40 Steel plate tc ⫽ 20 mm
tc ⫽ 30 mm tc ⫽ 40 mm
tc ⫽ 50 mm tc ⫽ 55 mm tc ⫽ 30 mm tc ⫽ 40 mm
20 20
In-plane tc ⫽ 45 mm In-plane
0 0
0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0 0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0
Interstorey drift: % Interstorey drift: %
(a) (b)

140

120 120
Maximum shear stress: N mm⫺2

100 100
Shear stress: N mm⫺2

80 80

60 λ ⫽ 100 60
λ ⫽ 200
40 λ ⫽ 300 40 FEM results
λ ⫽ 400
20 λ ⫽ 500 20 Equation 2

0 0
0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0
Interstorey drift: % Aspect ratio: %
(c) (d)

Figure 8. Influences of concrete panel thickness, height-to-

thickness ratio and aspect ratio: (a) influence of concrete panel
thickness (º ¼ 300); (b) influence of concrete panel thickness
(º ¼ 500); (c) influence of height-to-thickness ratio; (d) influence
of aspect ratio

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 61.167.60.237
8
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang

reaction curves under different thicknesses of the RC panel. under different aspect ratios is proposed based on curve fitting for
‘Steel plate’ indicates that there was no RC panel attached on the CSPSWs with RC panel thickness over the value tcmin
steel plate. ‘In plane’ indicates that the behaviour of the steel
plate resisted out-of-plane deformation. The shear stress is equal
to the lateral load divided by the area of cross-section of the steel 2: max ¼ (0:312 þ 0:96 þ 0:05) f v
plate. It can be seen that with the increase of the RC panels’
thickness, the load-carrying capacities increase gradually. When pffiffiffi
fv is the shear yield stress of steel, f v ¼ f y = 3: fy is the steel
the RC panel thickness increases to 55 mm, the behaviour of
yield stress.
CSPSW is similar to that of steel plate with restrained out-of-
plane deformation. This means that the 55 mm thickness RC
The load-carrying capacity Vmax of CSPSWs is calculated by
panel is able to prevent the buckling of the steel plate and makes
it work in-plane. This thickness of the RC panel is defined as the
‘critical thickness’ and is denoted as tcmin : When the steel plate’s V max ¼ max Lt ¼ (0:182 þ 0:56 þ 0:03) f y Lt
3:
height-to-thickness ratio is 300, the tcmin is 55 mm. If the steel
plate’s height-to-thickness ratio reaches 500, the corresponding
tcmin is 45 mm. The critical thickness decreases with the increase
of height-to-thickness ratio. For CSPSW connected to both frame
beams and frame columns, when the RC panels are attached on 6. Simplified eccentric X-brace model
both sides of the steel plate, the American Code ANSI/AISC 6.1 Rigidity of CSPSWs
341-05 (ANSI/AISC, 2005) prescribes the minimum thickness of Under horizontal load V, the bending moment and shearing force
concrete panel as 100 mm, which is clearly thicker for CSPSW diagrams on CSPSWs are shown in Figure 9. The horizontal
connected to frame beams only. deformation includes deflection ˜M owing to bending moment
and deflection ˜Q owing to shear. In the elastic stage, the drift at
5.2.2 Height-to-thickness ratio top beam, ˜, can be calculated as follows
The influence of height-to-thickness ratio, º, on monotonic mech-
anical performance of CSPSWs was also investigated. From the
above analysis it can be seen that the behaviour of CSPSWs is VH 3 1:2VH
˜ ¼ ˜M þ ˜Q ¼ þ
similar to that of steel plate resisting out-of-plane deformation 4: 12Es I GA
when the RC panel thickness is above the value tcmin : Only the
steel plate, whose out-of-plane deformation is restrained, is
analysed in the following. It is assumed that RC panels are thick where I is the moment of inertia of the steel plate
enough to resist the out-of-plane buckling of the steel plate. The
height and length of the steel plate are both 3000 mm. Different
5: I ¼ tL3 =12
height-to-thickness ratios º are obtained by adjusting the thick-
ness from 30 mm to 6 mm, and the corresponding º varies from
100 to 500. Figure 8(c) shows the shear stress–interstorey drift
where L is the steel plate length, H is the steel plate height,  is
reaction curves under different height-to-thickness ratios. It can
the aspect ratio
be seen that the height-to-thickness ratio of the steel plate has no
influence on the rigidity and the maximum shear stress.
6: L ¼ H
5.2.3 Aspect ratio
For CSPSWs, the function of RC panels resists the out-of-plane
deformation of the steel plate. The load-carrying capacity of
CSPSWs mainly relies on the aspect ratio (plate length, L, to L
plate height, H, ratio). In the process of calculation, the height of V VH/2
the steel plate is 3000 mm. The aspect ratio varies from 0.5 to 2.0
by changing the plate length. Figure 8(d) shows the relationship
curve between the maximum shear stress and the aspect ratio. It H V
Y
can be seen that the shear stress increases as the aspect ratio
increases. The reason is that more of the steel plate was fixed by X
Z VH/2
the frame beams with the increase of the aspect ratio. For Mp Qp
CSPSWs connected with frame beams only, it can be seen that
the behaviour of CSPSWs is similar to that of the steel plate Figure 9. Shearing force and bending moment diagrams for
resisting out-of-plane deformation when the RC panel thickness CSPSW
is over the value tcmin : The equation of maximum shear stress
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
9
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang

L
The Poisson ratio of steel is  ¼ 0:3: The shear modulus, G, can
be written as V

A D
Es Es
G¼ ¼ :
7: 2(1 þ ) 2 6 l l
H

The cross-section of steel plate, A, is calculated as

8: A ¼ tL C α B

Using Equations 4 to 8, the interstorey displacement, ˜, becomes

(a)
Δ
˜ ¼ ˜M þ ˜Q A D
V 3:12V α α
¼ þ
Es t3 Es t δ δ
 
V 1 3:12
¼ þ
9: E s t 3 

If V ¼ 1, the deformation, tot , becomes

 
1 1 3:12
tot ¼ þ C B
10: E s t 3 
(b)

Figure 10. Simplified eccentric cross-bracing model: (a) simplified

The elastic rigidity, K0 , can be obtained as
eccentric cross-bracing model; (b) deformation of frame and brace

Es t
K 0 ¼ 1=tot ¼ 3
11: (1=) þ 3:12(1=)
without strain hardening in compression and tension; the
elastic modulus of brace is equal to Es
j when the CSPSWs reach the load-carrying capacity, the stress
6.2 Simplified eccentric X-brace model on braces reaches the yielding stress of y :
The experimental results demonstrated the excellent behaviour of
CSPSWs, but it is hard to simulate when shell elements are used
6.2.1 Area of brace
in structural systems owing to convergence problems. Hence, a
In elastic stage, under lateral load, V, the deformation of frame
simplified analysis method is urgently needed by both engineers
and brace is shown in Figure 10(b). The axial deformation of the
and researchers. For CSPSWs connected to frame beams only, the
brace, , can be obtained from the following equation
eccentric X-brace model is proposed, as shown in Figure 10(a).
The lateral load is carried by eccentric braces in the direction Æ,
V
which can be obtained as ¼ cos Æ
13: K0
12: Æ ¼ arc(ctg(L=H))
When CSPSW reaches its load-carrying capacity, Vmax , the
corresponding deformation of brace is y and given as
The following assumptions are made for this simplified model
j the areas of these two braces are equal 14: y ¼ V max cos Æ=K 0
j the brace is subjected to tensional force or compressive force,
and there is no local or overall buckling
j the steel is assumed to behave as an elastic–plastic material The deformation of brace can also be written as
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
10
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang

F N Lb 500
y ¼ 400
15: E s Ab
300
200

Load: kN
where FN is the force in the brace, Lb is the length of the brace, 100
Ab is the area of the brace 0
⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50
⫺100
⫺200
V max
FN ¼ ⫺300 Test
16: 2 cos Æ
⫺400 Brace model
⫺500
Interstorey displacement: mm
(a)
17: Lb ¼ L= cos Æ
400
300
Using Equations 15, 16 and 17, the deformation of the brace can
be written as 200
100
Load: kN

V max L 0
y ¼ ⫺50 ⫺40 ⫺30 ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40 50
18: 2Es Ab cos2 Æ ⫺100
⫺200
Test
Using Equations 14 and 18, the area of the brace can be ⫺300 Brace model
expressed as ⫺400
Interstorey displacement: mm
(b)
LK 0
Ab ¼
19: 2Es cos3 Æ Figure 11. Comparison of load–interstorey displacement reaction
curves: (a) SC1; (b) SC3

Using Equations 11 and 19, the area of the brace can be

expressed as  y ¼ (0:182 þ 0:56 þ 0:03)

23: 3 ½(1=)3 þ 3:12(1=) cos2 Æ f y

Lt
Ab ¼
20: 2 cos ƽ(1=)3 þ 3:12(1=)
3

Figure 11 shows the comparison between experimental results and

results based on the simplified brace model. It can be seen that
6.2.2 Yield stress of the brace they agree well with each other, and this model can be suggested
The yield strain y of the brace can be written as to be used in the analysis of CSPSW systems with aspect ratios
from 0.5 to 2.0. In the references of Gao (2007) and Lu and Li
(2009), the aspect ratios of tested specimens were greater than 2.0
y V max or less than 0.5, and so cannot be used to validate the accuracy of
y ¼ ¼
21: Lb 2Es A cos Æ the simplified model. In further research, more experiments should
be done to validate the accuracy of this simplified X-brace model.

The yield stress  y is obtained from Equation 22

7. Conclusion
The hysteretic behaviour of CSPSWs connected to frame beams
V max is studied. The results showed that both SPSWs and CSPSWs
 y ¼ E s y ¼
22: 2A cos Æ connected to frame beams exhibited good ductility and high
energy dissipation capacity. The existence of RC panels resisted
out-of-plane buckling of the steel plate, so that the load-carrying
Using Equations 3 and 22, the yield stress of the brace is capacity and energy dissipation capacity increased. Comparing
calculated as with SPSWs, the load-carrying capacity of CSPSWs increased by
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
11
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Structures and Buildings
48%. A finite-element model was developed to analyse the
behaviour of CSPSWs, and its accuracy was validated by
comparing with experimental results. The analytical results
showed that the aspect ratio influenced the load-carrying capacity.
With an increase of aspect ratio, the load-carrying capacity
increased. Finally, a simplified eccentric X-brace model was
proposed, which can be used in the analysis of shear wall
systems. In further research, more experiments should be done to
validate the accuracy of this simplified model.
Acknowledgements
The project is supported by Key Laboratory of Concrete and Pre-
stressed Concrete Structure of Ministry of Education and the
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (HIT.
NSRIF.2010014), which are gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
ACI (American Concrete Institute) (2008) ACI318-08: Building
code requirements for reinforced concrete. American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, USA.
ANSI/AISC (2005) ANSI/AISC 341-05. Seismic provisions for
structural steel building. American Institute of Steel
Construction, Chicago, IL, USA.
Astaneh-Asl A (2002) Seismic Behavior and Design of Composite
steel Plate Shear Walls. Steel Tips Report, Structural Steel
Educational Council, USA.
Code of China (1996) JGJ 101-96: Specification of testing
methods for earthquake resistant building. China Architecture
& Building Press, Beijing, China (in Chinese).
Code of China (1998) GB/T2975: Steel and steel products-
location and preparation of test pieces for mechanical testing.
Chinese Code Press, Beijing, China (in Chinese).
Gao H (2007) Experimental and Theoretical Studies on
Composite steel Plate Shear Walls. Dissertation of Tongji
University (in Chinese).
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 61.167.60.237
12
On: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:54:54
Analysis of composite steel plate shear
walls connected with frame beams only
Guo, Rong, Ma and Zhang
Guo YL, Dong QL and Zhou M (2009) Tests and analysis on
hysteretic behavior of buckling-restrained steel plate shear
wall. Journal of Building Structures 30(1): 31–39 (in
Chinese).
Guo LH, Ma XB, Zhang SM et al. (2008) Experimental research on
seismic behavior of two-sided steel-concrete composite shear
walls. Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Steel
and Composite Structures, Graz, Austria, pp. 1467–1472.
Guo LH, Rong Q, Ma XB et al. (2011) Behavior of steel plate
shear wall connected with frame beams only. International
Journal of Steel Structures 11(4): 467–479.
Hitaka T and Matsui C (2003) Experimental study on steel shear
wall with slits. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE
129(5): 586–595.
Lu Y and Li GQ (2009) Experimental study on buckling-restrained
steel plate shear wall with large aspect ratio. Proceedings of
5th International Symposium on Steel Structures, Seoul, South
Korea, pp. 623–628.
Rahai A and Hatami F (2009) Evaluation of composite shear wall
behavior under cyclic loadings. Journal of Constructional
Steel Research 65(7):1528–1537.
Sun FF, Li GQ and Gao H (2007) Experimental research on seismic
behavior of two-side composite steel plate walls. Proceedings
of the 3rd International Conference on Steel and Composite
Structures (ICSCS07), Manchester, UK, pp. 805–811.
Tsai KC, Lin YC and Lin CH (2007) Seismic responses and design
of steel plate shear wall. Progress in Steel Building Structures
9(5):19–25 (in Chinese).
Zhang SM, Wu ZJ, Ma XB (2008) Influence of precast concrete
plate on static behavior of steel-concretecomposite shear wall.
Journal of Architecture and Civil Engineering 25(1): 18–22
(in Chinese).
Zhao Q and Astaneh-Asl A (2004) Cyclic behavior of traditional
and innovative composite shear walls. Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE 130(2): 271–284.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the
editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be
forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered
appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as a
discussion in a future issue of the journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in
by civil engineering professionals, academics and students.
Papers should be 2000–5000 words long (briefing papers
should be 1000–2000 words long), with adequate illustra-
tions and references. You can submit your paper online via
www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals, where you
will also find detailed author guidelines.