University of Jordan

School of Engineering
Civil Engineering Department

Scientific Research Methodology (0901748)

Term Project

Spring 2018/2019

Student name: Tareq Ghafri

Student ID: 8181943

2
Research Topic

Improving seismic behavior of composite steel plate shear wall using Innovative
damping system.

Hypothesis:

A new system of composite steel plate shear wall innovates to increase the
shear force capacity and ductility.

Research Significance:

A new composite shear wall system consists of a steel plate shear wall with a
reinforced concrete wall attached to one side of it using bolts, bounded by
steel beams and columns, the reinforced wall is attached with four damping
corners which made of structural steel and connected with the steel frame using
Springs.

The proposed system builds on the principles used to improve shear force capacity
and ductility which lead to high performance lateral load resisting system.

And this research considered as an addition or development of Astaneh [1]

innovative (CSPSW) system.

3
Research Objectives:

1. To collect information on the behavior of the new system of composite shear

wall and to collect the results of cyclic tests conducted on this system in the
laboratories.

2. To further develop the innovative (CSPSW) system is proposed by Astaneh

2002[1], to increase the shear capacity by increasing drift percent and shear force
that cause fracture in the steel plat, and superior ductility and energy dissipation.

3. To conduct cyclic tests of the four specimens, first one representing traditional
Composite Shear Walls and the other three specimens representing the new system
of (CSPSW) but with different springs stiffness (very stiff, stiff, medium stiffness)
to establish their cyclic behavior regarding strength, stiffness, energy dissipation
and to choose the optimum stiffness of the damping system.

Literature Review
1. Astaneh 2002 [1] tested (CSPSW) two specimens on designed in traditional way
and the other designed with gap between the steel frame and the RC panel which is
just carried by steel plat using bolts. and its innovative system gives more ductile
response and prevent RC -panel corners crushing under high shear loads and
displacements.

2. Qihao hann 2011 [2] represent anew multi RC panel composite steel plate shear
wall Numerical analysis a cyclic test is conducted to investigate the seismic
behavior of MBR-CSPSW system. analysis and tests showed that the MBR-
CSPSW system gives stable shear capacity and superior shear dissipation capacity.

3. Bin wang [3] using opensees new analytical program to simulate the hysteretic
behavior of CSPSW, and study CSPSW main affecting parameters and have the
result that: 1. with increasing of steel plate ratio the load carrying and deformation
capacity increase significantly ,2. The axial compressive load ratio has a negative
impact on the seismic behavior, 3. High concrete strength has an obvious effect on
hysteric curves and deformation capacity, 4. The reinforcement ratio has a
negligible effect of deformation capacity and hysteric curves.
4
 4. Fukumoto [4] tested 1/4-scale steel plate, plain concrete, and composite shear
walls under axial and shear loads to study the effects of composite action between
the steel faceplates and the infill concrete, slenderness ratio, and stiffening methods
for the steel faceplates, on the response of SC walls. The composite
walls were constructed by assembling welded steel boxes and infilling them with
concrete: different from the construction discussed above. Qualitative conclusions
were drawn but they were by-and-large specific to the construction used.

5.Takeda [5] subjected seven composite wall panels to in-plane cyclic loading in
pure shear. The primary focus of their study was the effect of thickness of steel
faceplates, partitioning webs, and the use of studs, on the shear response of SC
panels. The specimens were composed of two steel faceplates, infill concrete,
headed steel studs anchoring the faceplates to the infill, and the partitioning webs
joining the steel faceplates: somewhat different to the construction discussed
above. The results of the Takeda study indicated that stud spacing, in the range
considered, had no effect on peak strength. These authors parsed the pre-peak
strength response into four regions: (1) elastic, (2) post-concrete cracking, (3) post-
buckling of steel faceplates, and (4) post yielding of steel faceplates. The shear
response of these SC panels was idealized using a perfectly plastic force-
displacement relationship because their lateral load capacity did not deteriorate at
shear strains less than 2%.

6.Sasaki et al. [6] tested seven flanged walls with aspect ratios ranging between
0.33 and 0.5 to investigate the effects of aspect ratio, reinforcement ratio, axial
load, and the use of headed studs attached to the end plates of the web wall on the
flexural-shear response of SC walls. A faceplate slenderness ratio of 33 was used.
They reported the lateral stiffness and strength of a flanged SC walls increase with
decreasing shear span-to-depth ratio and increasing reinforcement ratio, which is
somewhat intuitive. Increases in axial load led to an increase in lateral strength but
not initial stiffness.

7.Ozaki [7] tested flanged walls with different aspect and reinforcement ratios
under lateral loading to investigate the in-plane response of shear-critical and
flexure-critical SC walls. Five shear-critical SC specimens with aspect ratios
ranging from 0.5 to 0.85 and reinforcement ratios ranging from 0.7% to 2% were
tested.
The reinforcement ratio had a small effect on the initial stiffness and cracking
strength of the shear-critical SC walls but it significantly affected the yield and the
peak lateral loads. The displacements corresponding to the yield and lateral loads
were not affected by reinforcement ratio. Four flexure-critical SC walls with

5
aspect ratios of 0.7 and 0.85, and a reinforcement ratio of 2%, were also tested. The
design parameters considered in this part of their study were aspect ratio, axial
force, and type of SC wall connection to the foundation. Ozaki et al. proposed that
the bending strength of flexure-critical SC walls be calculated using the results of
plastic cross-section analysis. The interaction of axial force and bending moment
was ignored.

8.Nie [8] subjected twelve walls to axial and cyclic lateral loads to investigate the
effects of reinforcement ratio, concrete strength, thicknesses of the steel face and
flange plates, concrete reinforcement, and wall aspect ratio on the in-plane
response of SC walls. The reinforcement and aspect ratios varied from 4.6% to
7.1%, and from 1 to 2, respectively. The twelve specimens failed in flexure,
characterized by local buckling and fracture of the steel faceplates. Their test
results showed that peak strength increased as shear span-to-depth ratio decreased.
Changes in the concrete compressive strength had little effect on the stiffness of the
SC specimens.

9.Kurt [9] reported the effects of wall aspect ratio, wall thickness, and
reinforcement ratio on the monotonic response of SC wall piers. The finite element
codes ABAQUS and LSDYNA were used for the numerical simulations. Data from
tests of eight SC wall piers and the numerical simulations were used to derive
design equations for the lateral load capacity of SC wall piers.
The proposed equation for in-plane flexural capacity is parsed by aspect ratio
(ratio of height to length): (1) for aspect ratios of 0.5 and smaller, the capacity is
equal to the moment corresponding to the onset of yielding of the steel faceplates at
the compression end of the wall and (2) for aspect ratios of 1.5 and greater, the
capacity is equal to the plastic moment capacity of the wall cross-section. The
flexural capacity for intermediate aspect ratios are determined by linear
interpolation but accounts for wall thickness. The effects of co-existing axial and
shearing forces on flexural capacity are not addressed.
Research Design
Test specimens:
Because this research is development of Astaneh [1] research and to make the
result enable to comparison; the same scale of specimen, boundary steel frame,
steel plate, bolts between precast reinforced concrete and the steel plat, the same
thickness of the RC wall and the same material proprieties for all elements.

The only difference that the RC panel carried by the steel plat and attached to
innovative corners made of steel structure and connected to the steel frame by
three springs in each axis as shown in the figure (1.2).
6
 Figure 1.1

Figure 1.1 shows traditional specimen of composite shear wall consist of steel
frame bounded the steel plat wall which is connected with nails with RC panel.
The figure also shows that is the specimen attached to the loading beam and
reaction beam and ready for tested.
7
 Figure (1.2)

Figure (1.2) shows the innovative CSPSW that will be tested to study the seismic
behavior of the new system and compare the behavior and result with the
traditional and Astaneh CSPSW models.
Specimens materials:

columns beams Steel Type of Thickness Reinforcing

plate concrete of RC ratio
panel
New W12x120 W12x26 3/16in Pre-cast 3in 0.92%
system
Traditional W12x120 W12x26 3/16in Pre-cast 3in 0.92%
system

8
The steel plate used in the specimen wasA36.
The beams and columns were A572 Grade 50 steel.
The concrete wall in the specimens was a pre-cast concrete wall connected to the
steel plate using ½ inch diameter A325 bolts.
The concrete used in the specimens was specified to have f’c of 4,000 psi.
The added corners in the new system are used from W12x120 steel and springs
type and stiffens which to be used in the new system is not specified and it will be
chosen according to analytical study determine the internal force that will be
subjected to and then springs type will be specified.

Test set-up:
Cyclic test will be applied to the traditional specimen and the other three specimen
which represent the new CSPSW system with different spring stiffness.
The test specimens were ½-scale three stories.

The test set-up used in the project is shown in Figure 1.1. The main components of
test set-up are the 1500 kips (750 tons) actuator, the loading beam at the top and
the reaction beam at the bottom supported on reaction blocks. The beam at mid-
height of specimen was braced by two parallel beams, one on either side.
The bracings were added to simulate the bracing effects of floors in actual
buildings.

Hypothesis testing
The idea of using the new CSPSW system is to increase the shear capacity and
ductility of the CSPSW by the damping corners which will control the motion of
the RC panel under high drifts and shear loads that will prevent and delay the
buckling of the steel plat and the punching shear that happens between bolts and
steel plats (CSPSW general failure).
And the test will illustrate if the system will work as expected or not and to choose
the optimum stiffens of the damping system.

This research will cost not less than 20,000 JD and need six months at least to have
been applied.

9
 References
1. Astaneh-Asl, A. ~2001 ‘‘Seismic behavior and design of composite steel
plate shear walls,’’ Steel TIPS Report, Structural Steel Educational
Council, Moraga, Calif.
1.B Cyclic Behavior of Traditional and Innovative Composite
Shear Walls.
Qiuhong Zhao1 and Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, M. ASCE 2002.

2. Seismic behavior of buckling-restrained steel plate shear wall with

assembled multi-RC panels.
Qihao Han a, Yongshan Zhang a, DayangWang , Hiroyasu Sakata.

3. Seismic performance of steel plate reinforced concrete shear wall and its
application in China Mainland
Bin Wang, Huanjun Jiang , Xilin Lu.

4. Fukumoto T, Kato B, Sato K. Concrete filled steel bearing walls. IABSE

report;1987.

5. Takeda T, Yamaguchi T, Nakayama T, Akiyama K, Kato Y. Experimental study

on shear characteristics of concrete filled steel plate wall. In: 13 th International
conference on structural mechanics in reactor technology (SMiRT13).
Porto Alegre (Brazil): International Association for Structural Mechanics in
Reactor Technology (IASMiRT); 1995. p. 3–14.

6. Sasaki N, Akiyama H, Narikawa M, Hara K, Takeuchi M, Usami S. Study on a

concrete filled steel structure for nuclear power plants (part #2): shear and bending
loading tests on wall member. In: 13th International conference on structural
mechanics in reactor technology (SMiRT13).
Porto Alegre (Brazil): International Association for Structural Mechanics in
Reactor Technology (IASMiRT); 1995. p. 27–32.

7. Ozaki M, Akita S, Niwa N, Matsuo I, Usami S. Study on steel plate reinforced

1
0
concrete bearing wall for nuclear power plants part 1: shear and bending
loading tests of SC walls. In: 16th International conference on structural mechanics
in reactor technology (SMiRT16). Washington (DC,USA): International
Association for Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (IASMiRT); 2001.

8. Jian-Guo N, Hong-Song H, Jian-Sheng F, Mu-Xuan T, Sheng-Yong L, Fu-Jun L.

Experimental study on seismic behavior of high-strength concrete filled
double-steel-plate composite walls. J Constar Steel Res 2013; 88:206–19.

9. Kurt EG, Varma AH, Booth P, Whittaker AS. In-plane behavior and design of
rectangular SC wall piers without boundary elements. J Struct Eng. 2016;
142:04016026-1–04016026-16.

1
1
1
2