International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue5- May 2013
Some Studies on Behavior Of Steel Plate Shear
Wall In Earthquake Prone Area: A Review
Gajendra Kumar Verma*1 and Savita Maru2
1
PhD.Scholar, Civil Deptt.,Ujjain. Engineering College, Ujjain
2
Professor, Civil Deptt.,Ujjain. Engineering College, Ujjain
Abstract - A steel plate shear wall (SPW) is a lateral-loadresisting system consisting of vertical steel plate infills connected
to the surrounding beams and columns and installed in one or
more bays along the full height of the structure to form a
cantilevered wall. SPSW subjected to cyclic inelastic
deformations exhibit high initial stiffness, behave in a very
ductile manner, and dissipate significant amounts of energy.
These characteristics make them suitable to resist seismic
loading.
The emergence of steel plate shear walls, both as a topic
of research and in actual construction, began in the early 1970's.
Most of the structures constmcted during this period that
employed steel shear walls were built in Japan and the United
States, and they were generally a substitute for conventional
reinforced concrete shear walls. As a result, the earliest research
came from Japan and the United States, the Japanese being the
first to study the overall behaviour of steel plate shear walls
[Takahashi et al., 19731. Prior to key research performed in the
1980s, the design approach used by the Japanese and Americans
concentrated on preventing the steel plate shear panels from
buckling prior to the attainment of shear yield. In Japan, this
was achieved by reinforcing the thin panels with a relatively
large number of longitudinal and transverse stiffeners and in the
United States, this was achieved by using the thick steel plate
shear walls. Both the solution had economic implications with
respect to material cost and erection.
However, several experimental and analytical studies
using both quasistatic and dynamic loading showed that the postbuckling strength and ductility of thin unstiffened SPSW can be
substantial and that is why The unstiffened steel plate shear wall
is included as a “Basic Seismic Force Resisting System” in ASCE
7 and AISC 341.
reinforced concrete. But now days Steel Plate Shear Wall
(SPSW) is employed in several structures in USA, Japan,
Canada and UK. Steel Plate Shear Wall system has relatively
large energy dissipation capability, thus being very attractive
for high risk earthquake zones.The post bucking strength and
tension field action mechanism (as shown in Fig-1) has been
recognized as early as in the 1930s in aerospace engineering
(Wagner, 1931), and as early as in the 1960s in steel building
construction, when it was incorporated in to the design
process of plate girders ( Basler, 1961). The appropriateness
of post-bucking stiffness and strength characteristics of SPSW
to resist service lateral loads was analytically predicted by
Thorburn in (1983) and experimentally confirmed by Timler
and Kulak (1983).
Research on unstiffened
steel plate shear walls has
investigated the effect of simple versus rigid beam-to-column
connections on the overall behavior ( Caccese et al., 1993),
the dynamic response of steel plate shear walls
(Sabouri_Ghomi and Roberts, 1992; Rezai,1999), the effects
of holes in the infill plates ( Roberts and Sabouri-Ghomi,1992;
Vian and Bruneau, 2004), the use of low-yield-point steel and
light-gauge steel (Vian and Bruneau, 2004; Berman and
Bruneau, 2005), and infill connections (Elgaaly 1998;
Schumacher et al.,1999). Furthermore, finite-element
modeling of unstiffened steel plate shear walls has been
Keywords : Steel plate shear walls (SPSW); steel building, strip
modeling; aspect ratio;
I. INTRODUCTION
Recently there has been a considerable increase in the number
of tall building, both residential and commercial and the
modern trend is towards taller and more slender structure.
Thus the effect of lateral loads like wind loads, earthquake
forces and blast forces are attaining increasing importance and
almost every designer is faced with the problem of providing
adequate strength and stability against lateral loads. There are
number of lateral load resisting system but shear wall system
is commonly adopted in high-rise building. The shear wall
systems have conventionally been built almost exclusively of
ISSN: 2231-5381
FIG: .1 Idealized Tension Field in a SPSW
investigated in some of the aforementioned papers, as well as
by Elgaaly et al. (1993) and Driver et al.(1997). Takahashi et
al. (1973)who is believed to have conducted the first extensive
research programme on the behaviour of steel plate shear wall
panels, found that under cyclic loads heavily stiffened steel
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 1392
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue5- May 2013
panels perform better in shear than unstiffened steel panels,
although it is unlikely that they would be economical in most
markets. The following sections describe the primary research
developments related to unstiffened steel plate shear walls,
with an emphasis on analytical techniques.
II.
LITERATURE REVIEW
1.Thorburn et al. (1983)
The first comprehensive analytical investigations of
conventional unstiffened steel plate shear walls were
conducted at the University of Alberta. Thorburn et al. (1983)
recognised that buckling of the infill plate due to lateral loads
does not represent the ultimate capacity of steel plate shear
walls and that the inclined tension field dominated the postbuckling behaviour of the infill plates. An analytical model—
termed the strip model (as shown in Fig-2) was developed to
simulate the tension field behaviour, wherein the infill plate is
modelled as a series of tension–only strips oriented at the
same angle of inclination, α, as the tension field. present. The
strip model assumes that the boundary beams are infinitely
stiff in order to reflect the presence of opposing tension fields
above and below the modelled panel.
diagonal brace represents the stiffness characteristics of the
tension field in the infill plate, assuming rigid boundary
elements. The equation for the area of the brace is as follows:
=
∝.
.
where φ is the acute angle of the brace with respect to the
column and all other parameters are as defined above. The
equivalent brace model is considered as a preliminary design
tool for steel plate shear walls. Thorburn et al. (1983)
conducted a parametric study to assess the effect on the panel
stiffness and strength of the plate thickness, the panel height,
the panel width, and the column flexural stiffness. It was
found that the parameters were closely interdependent with
one another and their interaction complex.
2. Timler and Kulak (1983)
To verify the analytical method developed by Thorburn et al.
(1983), Timler and Kulak (1983) tested a full-scale specimen
that represented two single–storey, one–bay steel plate shear
wall elements. Due to the testing procedure implemented in
this research, the columns were the horizontal elements while
the beams were vertical. The specimen was loaded in an
incremental manner to both service and ultimate levels. A
cyclic load test up to the allowable deflection limit was also
performed. The researchers recognized that the flexural
stiffness of the columns affects the value of α. Thus, the
equation for α, originally developed by Thorburn et al. (1983),
was modified as follows:
tan ∝ =
FIG: 2. Strip Model of SPSW
Thorburn et al. (1983) showed that ten strips per panel
adequately represent the tension field action developed in the
plate. Thorburn et al. (1983) derived an following equation for
determining α:
.
tan ∝ =
.
---------- (i)
where t is the thickness of the infill plate, Ac and Ab are the
cross-sectional areas of the column and beam, respectively,. In
order to simplify the iterative process of designing a steel
plate shear wall, Thorburn et al. (1983) developed a Pratt truss
model, known as the equivalent brace model. The infill plate
at a single storey is modelled as a single diagonal tension-only
brace intersecting the working points of the frame. The
ISSN: 2231-5381
--------------(ii)
.
--------- (iii)
.
.
.
where Ic is the moment of inertia of the column about an axis
perpendicular to the panel and all other parameters were
defined earlier. It was found that for the case of beams that
have an infill plate on one side only, and are therefore free to
bend, such as the beam at the top of a shear wall (or the edge
of the test specimen), the flexural stiffness of the beam affects
α. Thus, the equation for α was re-derived for the infill plate at
the top of a steel plate shear wall and was presented as
follows:
tan ∝ =
(
.
.
.
.
.
.
)
----------(iv)
where Ib is the moment of inertia of the beam about an axis
perpendicular to the panel and all other parameters were
defined previously.
Timler and Kulak (1983) modeled their test specimen using
the strip model. Since an elastic analysis program was utilised,
inelastic behaviour was simulated in the boundary members
by successive reductions in the cross-sectional properties of
the entire length of the members and in the strips by limiting
the stress to the static yield stress measured from tension
coupons. Good correlation was found between predicted and
actual values of the infill plate stresses, axial strains, and the
load vs. deflection response. The discrepancies found in using
the Thorburn et al. (1983) equation for α were minor.
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 1393
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue5- May 2013
However, it was recommended that the equation (iii) be used
to describe more accurately the angle of the tension field.
3. Tromposch And Kulak (1987)
Tromposch and Kulak (1987) performed a test on a large scale
SPSW similar to that tested by Timler and Kulak (1983). The
major differences between the two were the change in bay
dimension, the use of bolted rather than welded beam to
column connection, thinner plate (3.25 mm) and stiffer beams.
In addition, the columns were pre-stressed before testing to
simulate gravity loads on the structure. The main objectives of
the tests were to examine the hysteretic behaviour of the
specimen and to verify the analytical strip model proposed by
Thorburn et al (1983). The specimen displayed ductile
behaviour with severely pinched hysteresis curves due to the
thin infill plate and flexible boundary frame. Tromposch and
Kulak also showed that the strip model (Thorburn et al. 1983)
gave conservative estimates of both initial stiffness and
ultimate capacity of steel plate shear walls. Inelastic behaviour
was accounted for in a similar manner to that used by Timler
and Kulak (1983). Tromposch and Kulak (1987) also found
that the eccentricity of the fish plate with respect to the centre
of the boundary members had no noticeable effect on the
performance of the steel plate shear wall specimen.
4.Elgaaly, Caccese, And Du (1993)
Elgaaly et al (1993) used finite-element models, and models
based on the revised multi-strip method proposed by Timler
and Kulak (1983), to replicate results experimentally achieved
by Caccese et al (1993). The finite element model used
nonlinear material properties and geometry, a 6x6 mesh to
represent the plates on each story and six beam elements for
each frame member. The 0.075 in. and 0.106 in. (1.9 mm and
2.7 mm) plate thickness used in the finite-element models
were identical to those from the experimental work. Momentresisting beam-to-column connections were assumed. Lateral
load was monotonically applied until loss of stability
developed due to column plastic hinging and flange local
buckling .It was found that the wall with thicker plates was
not significantly stronger because column yielding was the
governing factor for both cases.
The specimen using moment resisting beam-tocolumn connections and the 0.075 in. (1.9mm) thick plate was
also modeled using the multi-strip method. Twelve strips were
used to represent the plate at each story. The angle of
inclinations of the strips was found to be 42.8 degree, which
agreed well with the results of the finite element model that
predicted the principal strains in the middle of the plates
oriented between 40 and 50 degree with the vertical. Using an
elastic perfectly plastic stress-strain curve for the strips, the
model was found to produce results in reasonable agreement
with the experimental results with respect to initial stiffness,
ultimate strength, and displacement at the ultimate strength.
An analytical model for predicting the hysteretic
cyclic behavior of thin steel plate shear walls was also
developed. This model was based on the strip model but
ISSN: 2231-5381
incorporated strips in both directions (Figure -3), which is
necessary to capture cyclic behavior. The hysteretic model
involved the use of an empirically derived, hysteretic, stressstrain relationship for the strips, and good agreement with
experimental results was reported.
Fig:3. Cyclic Strip Model
.5.Xue And Lu (1994)
Xue and Lu (1994) performed an analytical study on a three
bay, 12-story, moment-resisting frame structure, which had
the middle bay infilled with a steel plate shear wall. The effect
of beam-to-column and plate connections was the focus of this
study. Four scenarios were considered:
1. Moment resisting beam-to-column connections and infill
plates fully connected to the surrounding frame.
2. Moment-resisting beam-to-column connections and the
infill plates attached to only the beams.
3. Simple beam-to-column connections and fully-connected
infill plates.
4. Simple beam-to-column connections with infill plates
connected only to the beams.
Plate thicknesses were the same for each
configuration but varied along the height Stories 1 to 4, 5 to 8,
and 9 to 12, respectively, had 0.11-in., 0.094-in., and 0.087-in.
(2.8-mm, 2.4-mm and 2.2-mm) thick plates. The exterior bays
were 360 in. (9,144 mm) wide the interior ( infilled) bay was
144 in. (3,658 mm) wide, and all stories were 144 in ( 3,658
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 1394
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue5- May 2013
mm) tall, except the first story, which was 180 in. (4,572 mm)
tall.
The finite-element analysis considered beams and
columns modeled using elastic beam elements and plates
modeled using elasto-plastic shell elements. Each model was
subjected to pushover analysis with forces applied at each
story.
It was found that the type of beam-to-column
connection in the infilled bay had an insignificant effect on the
global force-displacement behavior of the system and that
connecting the infill panels to the columns provided only a
modest increase in the ultimate capacity of the system. Xue
and Lu (1994) concluded that connecting the infill plates to
only the beams and using simple beam-to-column connections
in the interior bay was the optimal configuration because this
drastically reduced the shear forces in the interior columns
and helped avoid premature column failure. However, because
the small number of cases considered does not allow
generalization of this observation. This recommendation has
not been implemented in the NEHRP Provisions or AISC 341.
6. Driver et al. (1997; 1998a, b)
Driver et al. (1997; 1998a) tested a large–scale, four–storey,
single bay steel plate shear wall specimen to identify the
elastic stiffness, ductility and energy absorption capacity. The
specimen had moment–resisting beam-to-column connections,
fishplates welded connection was used to connect the infill
plates. The Gravity loads were applied to the tops of the
columns, and cyclic lateral loads of equal magnitude were
applied at each floor level, as per the requirements of ATC-24
(Applied Technology Council 1992). The test behavior
showed that a properly designed steel plate shear wall system
is an excellent lateral load-resisting system for seismic
loading.
Driver et al. (1997; 1998b) also developed an finite element
models to predict the structural behaviour of the steel plate
shear wall specimen. This analysis was found to be in
excellent agreement with the experimental data, but was
unable to reach the full shear wall capacity. A full response
analysis was also performed and provided an excellent
prediction of ultimate strength but overestimated the initial
stiffness by about 15%.
7. Elgaaly and Liu (1997)
Elgaaly and Liu (1997) conducted an analytical investigation
of steel plate shear walls. Based on test observations made by
Caccese et al. (1993), it was found that the tension strains in
the infill plate were not uniform throughout, but were higher
near the boundary members. To reflect this observation, the
researchers modified the trilinear material model (Elgaaly et
al. 1993a) by incorporating square gusset plates at the ends of
the tension strips. An angle of inclination of the tension strips
was assumed 45° and an empirical plastic deformation factor
was incorporated into the analysis to obtain good agreement
between the analytical model and the quarter–scale test
specimens of Cacceseet al. (1993).
ISSN: 2231-5381
8. Lubell (1997)
Lubell (1997) conducted experiments on two one–storey steel
plate shear wall specimens and one four–storey specimen .In
all specimens, the beams were connected to the columns using
moment–resisting connections. Steel masses were placed at
each storey of specimen to simulate gravity loading. Quasistatic cyclic testing was performed on all three specimens.
Fifteen equally spaced tension–only inclined elements were
used to represent the infill plate of each panel and were
oriented, with respect to the column, at an angle of 37. Two
types of strip models were created. The first used monotonic
loading to describe the pushover envelope behaviour of the
specimens. The second used reversed cyclic loading to
describe the hysteretic behaviour of the models. In the second
model, the tension–only strips were inclined in both
directions, giving a total of thirty strips per panel. The results
for the monotonic SPSW model were found to be inconsistent
with the test results. The model predicted a higher initial
stiffness and ultimate strength (10% above test ultimate
strength). Overall behaviour of the cyclic model matched that
of the test. However, a few minor localized differences were
attributed to the numerical modeling simplifications used. It
was found that neither could accurately describe the specimen
pushover envelope behaviour completely. Lubell (1997)
conducted a series of parametric studies, using the SPSW
monotonic model, to investigate the sensitivity of certain
model parameters. It was found that the initial stiffness was
not overly sensitive to changes in infill plate thickness, t, but
the ultimate strength was found to increase as t increased. It
was also found that as α decreases, both the initial stiffness
and the ultimate strength of the specimen decreased.
9. Timler et al. (1998)
An analytical study were performed on design and cost
feasibility of steel plate shear walls at Canada. Comprehensive
designs of medium–sized office buildings with steel plate
shear walls of varying ductility ratings for different locations
across Canada were conducted and compared with alternative
designs using reinforced concrete shear walls. It was found
that for steel plate shear wall structures, the super- and substructure works were less expensive than traditional reinforced
concrete shear wall forms. It was also found that a building
with steel plate shear walls could be turned over to the owner
substantially more quickly than a similar building with a
reinforced concrete core. These factors both contribute to the
economic feasibility of steel plate shear wall structures.
10. Rezai (1999)
Rezai (1999) performed shake-table testing on a 1:4 scale,
four–storey steel plate shear wall specimen nearly identical to
the one tested by Lubell (1997) to study the dynamic
behaviour. This was the first time a test of this kind was
conducted on a steel plate shear wall specimen. The specimen
was subjected to various site-recorded and synthetically
generated ground motions at varying intensities. Due to
limitations of the shake table, the test results remained mainly
in the elastic range. Thus, the nonlinear behaviour of the steel
plate shear wall specimen could not be explored in detail.
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 1395
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue5- May 2013
Rezai (1999) found that the first mode was the primary mode
of vibration with very little contribution from higher modes.
The top storeys exhibited behaviour that suggested that
flexural behaviour dominated, while the bottom storey acted
as a shear panel throughout the test sequence. Based on the
load vs. deformation plots for all four storeys, it was shown
that the first storey dissipated the majority of energy, while
the top floors acted as a rigid body rotating about the first
floor. Also, it was found that the flexural strains generated in
the intermediate level beams could be considered negligible.
Rezai (1999) also conducted sensitivity analyses to assess the
effects of various structural properties on the value of the
angle of inclination of the infill plate tension field, α. One
structural property was changed while the remainder were
kept constant. Five different test specimens were used.It was
found that α did not vary significantly for any change in beam
and column cross-sectional area and for infill plate
thicknesses, t, of 6 mm and greater.
11. Astaneh-Asl (2001)
An attempt at compiling a comprehensive document detailing
the behaviour and design of steel plate shear walls was made
by Astaneh-Asl (2001). Both stiffened and unstiffened panels
were examined and it was recommended that unstiffened infill
plates be used unless there are openings in the shear wall that
require stiffening. A chart was prepared for checking each
member in a steel plate shear wall system. Ductile failure
modes are ranked as more desirable than brittle failure modes
and are arranged first.
12. Kulak et al. (2001)
Kulak et al. (2001) presented an overview of steel plate shear
wall research conducted to date. A design example of a
hypothetical eight-storey building in Vancouver, Canada,
using steel plate shear walls as the lateral load resisting
system, was also presented. The preliminary design was
performed using the equivalent brace method and the detailed
design was performed using the strip model (Thorburn et al.
1983). The inelastic static and dynamic response of the shear
wall was also analyzed using a tension-compression strip
model, which is an extension of the tension–only strip model
and has inclined strips in both directions to resist lateral load
in either direction. A nonlinear pushover analysis was
conducted on the tension–compression strip model and it was
found that the shear wall had an over strength of about two
times with respect to the NBCC 1995 design shear. This over
strength resulted largely from using a minimum infill plate
thickness of 4.8 mm, which was considerably greater than
what was required as determined during the preliminary
design. A nonlinear dynamic time history analysis showed
that the inter storey drifts were well within the NBCC 1995
seismic limits, which implies that both structural and nonstructural elements are protected from damage due to the
stiffness of the steel plate shear wall.
13.Bruneau And Bhagwagar (2002)
Bruneau and Bhagwagar conducted nonlinear
inelastic dynamic analyses to investigate how structural
ISSN: 2231-5381
behavior is affected when thin infills of steel, low-yield steel
and other nonmetallic materials are used to seismically retrofit
steel frames located in regions of low and high seismicity,
namely, New York City and Memphis. A typical three-bay
frame extracted from an actual 20- story hospital building in
New York City was considered for this purpose. Fully rigid
and perfectly flexible frame connection rigidities were
considered to capture the extremes of frame behavior. Thin
steel infill panels were found to reduce story drifts without
significant increases in floor accelerations, and low-yield steel
was found to lead to slightly better seismic behavior than
A572 Grade 50 steel under extreme seismic conditions, but at
the cost of some extra material.
14. Behbahanifard et al. (2003)
Behbahanifard et al. (2003) conducted an experimental and
numerical investigation of steel plate shear walls. The test
specimen was taken directly from the one tested by Driver et
al. (1998a), with the bottom panel removed due to the damage
from the original test, thus creating a large–scale, three-storey,
single–bay specimen. The loading sequence followed ATC-24
guidelines. Before the ultimate strength of the specimen was
reached, the first–level beam ruptured at the top flange and
web of the beam-to-column connection (after 50 cycles of
load, including the original test). Since one of the objectives
of the test was to observe the ultimate capacity of the wall and
behaviour of the boundary members under extreme loading
conditions, the fracture was repaired and testing continued.
The specimen reached its ultimate capacity at a deflection of
seven times the yield deflection, at which point the strength
started to deteriorate gradually due to the formation of tears in
the lower–storey infill plate. The specimen displayed high
elastic stiffness, excellent ductility, the ability to dissipate
high amounts of energy, stable hysteresis loops, and a high
degree of redundancy. A finite element model was also
developed for analysis of steel plate shear walls. Using this
finite element model, a parametric study was conducted to
identify parameters affecting the behaviour of a single panel
steel plate shear wall. It was found that altering the aspect
ratio of the infill plates within the range of 1.0 to 2.0 had a
negligible effect on the behaviour of the shear wall panel.
However, for aspect ratios less than 1.0, both stiffness and
shear capacity of the panel increase. Increasing the ratio of the
axial stiffness of the infill plate to that of the columns
(tL/2Ac) led to an increase in the stiffness of the shear wall
panel, but had a negligible effect on the shear capacity of the
system.
15. Berman and Bruneau (2003)
Using plastic analysis theory and the assumption of discrete
strips to represent the infill plate, Berman and Bruneau (2003)
derived equations to calculate the ultimate strength of singleand multi-storey steel plate shear walls with either simple or
rigid beam-to column connections. For multi-storey shear
walls, equations were developed based on two types of failure
mechanisms that provide a rough range of ultimate strengths:
soft storey failure and uniform yielding of the infill plates in
all storeys simultaneously. To provide a lower bound estimate
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 1396
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue5- May 2013
of capacity, the equation derived for single–storey steel plate
shear walls with simple beam-to-column connections was
used to predict the capacity of a variety of single- and multistorey steel plate shear wall specimens from the literature
having either pinned or semi-rigid connections. This equation
was found to underestimate the experimental capacities by an
average of about 6%, although it overestimated the capacity of
one case by about 9%. The equation derived for the soft storey
mechanism was found to overestimate the capacity of multistorey test specimens with rigid connections by about 17%.
This model provides only the ultimate capacity. The proposed
equations do not describe the initial stiffness, the ductility, or
the actual failure mechanism, nor do they provide a means of
determining the frame forces for use in design.
16.Kharrazi, Ventura, Prion, And Sabouri-Ghomi (2004)
Kharrazi et al.(2004) investigated the design of
SPSW systems in terms of the separate shear and bending
deformations occurring in a multi-story frame. They proposed
a modified plate-frame interaction model for the analysis of
shear and bending deformations and resulting forces in SPSW.
The objective was to describe the interaction between those
components and characterize the respective contributions to
deformations and strength.
The bending component of plate wall
behavior was investigated. Equations for moment and
displacement were derived for a single-story panel at the
critical point at which panel bucking occurs, assuming a linear
strain distribution across the wall cross-section. The procedure
assumes that, after panel bucking, the neutral axis will move
toward the column in tension, since compressive stresses in
the web will be released, similar to the neutral axis migration
in a reinforced concrete beam following section cracking on
the tension side. Expressions were developed for behavior of
the panel after this event. Equations for shear behavior and
bending behavior are combined using interaction equations to
complete the proposed method.
III. CONCLUSIONS
Thin unstiffened steel plate shear wall (SPSW) is rapidly
gaining popularity as a very effective lateral load resisting
system in highly seismic areas. A valuable research works
have been performed on SPSW worldwide to evaluate the
static and dynamic behavior of SPSW for the past three
decades. A detailed summary of these research and
development activities on various aspects of SPSW systems
have been presented which might be useful for researcher and
engineers in order to formulate efficient seismic design and
analysis techniques. Design methods need to be developed for
non-seismic loading, such as, wind, blast, fire, etc. In order to
make the analysis and design methods for SPSW convenient
for practical purposes new modeling techniques are also
necessary. It is expected that actual use of this relatively new
lateral load resisting system will greatly increase in the
coming decade through an effective cooperation among
researchers, code writers, practicing engineers and developers.
ISSN: 2231-5381
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors acknowledge the authors, editors and publishers
of all those articles, journals and books from where the
literature of this article has been reviewed and discussed.
REFERENCES
1.Thorburn, L.J., Kulak, G.L., and Montgomery, C.J. (1983). Analysis of steel
plate shear walls. Structural Engineering Report No. 107, Department of
Civil Engineering
,University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
2.Timler, P.A. and Kulak, G.L. (1983), "Experimental Study of Steel Plate
Shear
Walls",Structural Engineering Report No. 114, Department of Civil
Engineering,
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
3.Elgaaly, M., Caccese, V., and Du, C. (1993), “Postbuckling Behavior of
Steel-Plate Shear Walls Under Cyclic Loads”, Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, Vol.
119, No. 2, Feb. 1993, pp. 588-605.
4. Caccese, V. and Elgaaly, M. (1993). Experimental study of thin steel-plate
shear walls under cyclic load. J. of Structural Engrg, ASCE, 119, n. 2, pp.
573-587.
5. Xue, M. and Lu, L-W. (1994). Influence of steel shear wall panels with
surrounding frame members. Proceedings. SSRC Annual Technical Session.
Pp 339-354.
6. Driver, R. G., Kulak, G. L., Kennedy, D. J. L., and Elwi, A. E.
(1997).“Seismic behavior of steel plate shear walls.” Struct. Eng. Rep.
215,Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta,
Canada.
7. Elgaaly, M., and Lui, Y. (1997), “Analysis of Thin-Steel-Plate Shear
Walls”, Journal
of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 123, No. 11, Nov.
1997, pp 1487-1496.
8.Timler P.A.,Ventura C.E.,Prion H.,Anjam R. Experimental and analytical
studies of SPSW as applied to the design og tall building.The structural
design of tall building,1998 7(3) ,233-249
9. Rezai, M. (1999). “Seismic Behaviour of Steel Plate Shear Walls by Shake
Table Testing,” PhD Dissertation,Department of Civil Engineering,
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
10.Abolhassan Astanah- Asl, “Seismic Behaviour and Design of steel plate
shear walls”, SEONC seminar, Nov- 2001, San Francisco, pg.no. 1 to 18.
11. Astaneh, Abolhassan. “Seismic Behavior and Design of Steel Plate Shear
Walls,”
Structural Steel Educational Council Steel Tips. January 2001
12.Kaulak G.L.,Keneddy D.J.L.,Driver R.G.,Medhekar M.S., steel plate shear
walls: An Overview.AISC Engineering Journal,2001,First Quarter,38,50-62
13. Bruneau M, Bhagwagar T. Seismic retrofit of flexible steel frames using
thin infill panels. Engineering Structures 2002;24(4):443_53.
14. Behbahanifard, M. R., Grondin, G. Y., and Elwi, A. E. (2003).
“Experimental and numerical investigation of steel plate shear wall.” Struct.
Eng. Rep. 254, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton,
Alberta, Canada
15. Berman, J.W., and Bruneau, M. (2005), “Experimental Investigation of
Light-Gauge
Steel Plate Shear Walls”, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 124,
No. 2, Feb. 1998, pp. 121-130.
16. Sabouri-Ghomi, S., C.E. Ventura and M.H.K. Kharrazi, 2005. Shear
Analysis and Design of Ductile Steel Plate Walls, J. Structural Engineering
ASCE, 6: 878-889.
18.Steel Plate Shear Wall Buildings: Design Requirements and Research by
Michel Bruneau, P.E., Jeff Berman, Diego Lopez Garcia, and Darren Vian
19. A Closer Look at Steel Plate Shear Walls By Jason Ericksen, S.E., and
rafael sabelli, S.E. Steel Solution centre ,January 2008,Modern Steel
Construction.
20. Steel Plate Shear Walls: Practical Design and Construction By Ignasius F.
Seilie, P.E.
and John D. Hooper, P.E.(, Modern Steel Construction, April 2005)(
21.AISC Design Guide 20, Steel Plate Shear Walls -2007
22. Jonah J.Shishkin,Robert G. Driver and Gilbert Y.Grondin(2005). Analysis
of steel plate shear Walls using modified stip model. Structural Engineering
Report No. 261, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of
Alberta,Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 1397